Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Oolon Colluphid · 07-18-2002, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:

Are you saying there is an infinite gradient between life and non-life so that no such distinction exists? Kind of like the mathametician that kept dividing the distance between to points by two?

I believe he was asking for your definition of 'life'. Me too now. What are the characteristics that distinguish it from non-life? Get a definition, then we'll see if there's a gradient.

Oolon

MrDarwin · 07-18-2002, 08:46 AM

GeoTheo, you seem to be missing that there are multiple choices:

1. The universe had a supernatural origin, as did life.

2. The universe had a supernatural origin, but life had an entirely natural origin.

3. Both the universe and life had entirely natural origins.

Now, I'm open to the possibility that life may have had a supernatural origin. But life on earth may have been planted here by aliens (which really just pushes the origins question back) or some human may invent a time machine to go back in time and plant life on earth. But in the absence of any evidence, I'm not going to believe any of these things. Do you have any such evidence? If so, what is it?

MrDarwin · 07-18-2002, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:

Are you saying there is an infinite gradient between life and non-life so that no such distinction exists?

Do you believe that there is such a clear distinction? If so, would you mind clearly defining "life", and then maybe trying to define "death"? Neither is as clear-cut or as easily defined as most people think.

Oolon Colluphid · 07-18-2002, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:

You may be experiencing a paradigm shift. Don't fight it. enjoy the ride.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> < stupid stupid Oolon, will you never learn?

@ self >

TROLL ALERT!

Theo's given up on what little rationality he once possessed, and has reverted to the troll he was last time he was here.

DNFTT.

Starboy · 07-18-2002, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
Question: What is the biggest proof of evolution to an atheist?
Answer: Life.
If you don't see my point then I can't see what more there is worth discussing. You obviously can't think outside the little box you have created for yourselves.

Abiogenisis is obviously not a problem for an atheist. That is if he wants to remain an atheist.
If you could be convinced of creation you would not be atheists. As atheists you will never see creation. Nothing will convince you against your will. All you have to do is fold your arms and frown and use your imagination and come up with a way somthing could have evolved.

Hi GeoTheo,

Are you implying that there is a direct connection between atheism and evolution? When I use the word atheist I mean it in the sense of a-theist (not theistic i.e. apolitical � not political, asexual � not sexual, and asymmetrical � not symmetrical). A new born baby is an atheist but I have yet to meet one yet that can even say evolution let alone understand what it was, although I wouldn�t mind meeting one.

As a scientist the existence of life in itself is not supporting evidence for evolution. As a scientist I would say that the particular types of life, its varieties and relationships in ecosystems as well as fossil evidence for past types, varieties and ecosystems is confirming evidence for current theories of evolution.

Abiogenisis is an obvious problem for all scientists, but abiogenisis really has nothing to do with any theory of evolution. Abiogenisis is how life got started evolution is how it got to be the way it is today. Now if you want to discuss abiogenisis theories that is a completely different discussion from evolution.

I would have to be a complete moron to not think that somehow somewhere life got started. What I am not convinced of is that Genesis is how it happened.

Starboy

GeoTheo · 07-18-2002, 08:51 AM

This raises an interesting question.
Have you seen the duck that looks like a rabbit? Have you played with it in your mind switching back and forth? Or perhaps have you looked at a picture of a cube and rotated an imagined opening around all the sides, shifting the demensions while they remain static.
I can do that with theism and atheism. Can you?
It would be interesting if you could not.
This is related to Origins. I'm on topic.

seanie · 07-18-2002, 08:53 AM

If you're going to attribute opinions to new born babies surely agnosticism would be best.

I doubt they have much opinion either way on the exsitence of god.

Oolon Colluphid · 07-18-2002, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
I can do that with theism and atheism. Can you?

No. Seek help.

Atheism is theism looked at in a different way... Nope, don't get it. As someone has said, atheism is a religion in the same way that bald is a hair colour.

Oolon

GeoTheo · 07-18-2002, 08:57 AM

Oh, come on Oolon.
I think perspective is very important. Why not challenge yourself a little.
If you can't even concieve of the possibility of a designer than you are not objective.
It is a known fact that an observer changes phenomena.

Mageth · 07-18-2002, 09:01 AM

GeoTheo posted:

Do you mean "I don't claim that it does." Or "I don't claim that it could."?

To clear things up, I claim "I don't know what the origin of life was." I'm not claiming it's not knowable. And at this point I can't rule out natural, supernatural, alien seeding, or other proposed origins.

You said Life itself does not neccesarily prove life has a natural orign. I am asking you how could it have a supernatural one? If that's truly one of the two choices how do you know its a choice? Explain how life could have a supernatural origin. If you can't then there is only one choice.

Actually I said ""Life" is evidence of an origin of life. By itself life is not evidence that supports either natural or supernatural explanations for that origin." How you managed to morph that into the request for me to "explain how life could have a supernatural origin" escapes me. Truly surreal.

And why would what I can or cannot do affect the possibilities for the origin of life?

07-18-2002, 08:46 AM	#32
MrDarwin Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 4,140	GeoTheo, you seem to be missing that there are multiple choices: 1. The universe had a supernatural origin, as did life. 2. The universe had a supernatural origin, but life had an entirely natural origin. 3. Both the universe and life had entirely natural origins. Now, I'm open to the possibility that life may have had a supernatural origin. But life on earth may have been planted here by aliens (which really just pushes the origins question back) or some human may invent a time machine to go back in time and plant life on earth. But in the absence of any evidence, I'm not going to believe any of these things. Do you have any such evidence? If so, what is it?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-18-2002, 08:51 AM	#36
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	This raises an interesting question. Have you seen the duck that looks like a rabbit? Have you played with it in your mind switching back and forth? Or perhaps have you looked at a picture of a cube and rotated an imagined opening around all the sides, shifting the demensions while they remain static. I can do that with theism and atheism. Can you? It would be interesting if you could not. This is related to Origins. I'm on topic.

07-18-2002, 08:53 AM	#37
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	If you're going to attribute opinions to new born babies surely agnosticism would be best. I doubt they have much opinion either way on the exsitence of god.

07-18-2002, 08:57 AM	#39
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	Oh, come on Oolon. I think perspective is very important. Why not challenge yourself a little. If you can't even concieve of the possibility of a designer than you are not objective. It is a known fact that an observer changes phenomena.

07-18-2002, 09:01 AM	#40
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	GeoTheo posted: Do you mean "I don't claim that it does." Or "I don't claim that it could."? To clear things up, I claim "I don't know what the origin of life was." I'm not claiming it's not knowable. And at this point I can't rule out natural, supernatural, alien seeding, or other proposed origins. You said Life itself does not neccesarily prove life has a natural orign. I am asking you how could it have a supernatural one? If that's truly one of the two choices how do you know its a choice? Explain how life could have a supernatural origin. If you can't then there is only one choice. Actually I said ""Life" is evidence of an origin of life. By itself life is not evidence that supports either natural or supernatural explanations for that origin." How you managed to morph that into the request for me to "explain how life could have a supernatural origin" escapes me. Truly surreal. And why would what I can or cannot do affect the possibilities for the origin of life?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.