nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 103:
Line 103: + + +
→Claims of "Self-Replicating" Chemicals: But do they occur without life?
::: Neither is it the result of random processes, per evolution, but the result of intelligent design: "''And now so can a set of custom-designed chemicals.''". But the evolutionists somehow claim it to be a win for evolution! [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:51, 14 January 2009 (EST)
::: Neither is it the result of random processes, per evolution, but the result of intelligent design: "''And now so can a set of custom-designed chemicals.''". But the evolutionists somehow claim it to be a win for evolution! [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:51, 14 January 2009 (EST)
::::I would not consider it evolution, just that it shows a possible way that life could have started. There are many different models of how life started, this is just one. I would not go as far as saying it is intelligent design Philip since everything used for a similar experiment occured naturaly. Consider what is the difference between glucose created in the lab and glcose created from the body? The physical properties are the same. In the case of a similar Spiegelman Monster experiment, the base RNA code mutated over several generations (due to a lack of replication control enzymes) showing that many types of sequences could be formed from one base sequence with RNA.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 07:19, 14 January 2009 (EST)
::::I would not consider it evolution, just that it shows a possible way that life could have started. There are many different models of how life started, this is just one. I would not go as far as saying it is intelligent design Philip since everything used for a similar experiment occured naturaly. Consider what is the difference between glucose created in the lab and glcose created from the body? The physical properties are the same. In the case of a similar Spiegelman Monster experiment, the base RNA code mutated over several generations (due to a lack of replication control enzymes) showing that many types of sequences could be formed from one base sequence with RNA.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 07:19, 14 January 2009 (EST)
::::: Yes, in principle, if you are talking about a scientist simply replicating conditions that would have occurred "naturally" (I'll get back to that in a moment), then the fact that the scientist's intelligence was involved does not make an argument for intelligent design.
::::: But we are talking here about the origin of life, so if the materials that he uses are ones that only occur ''as the result of living things'', then they do not occur "naturally", in the sense of being in existence before life started. Glucose is the product of living things (which I would argue requires a designer). Similarly, I believe that both RNA and RNA replicase do not occur "naturally" (without the existence of living things). Is this correct?
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:01, 14 January 2009 (EST)