View Single Post
Old 02-25-2013, 21:11   #977
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 6,006
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
And yet you can't see how the opposite is also unreasonable. You can't say that "I, Artificial Grape, don't understand how life could have been designed. Perhaps it occurred by a natural process that was able to overcome diffusion and the octet rule of chemistry."
But the truth is, I can understand how life could be created, what I don't see is a shred of evidence to support Creation of life or a Creator. "God did it" is both lazy ("I give up, let's just say God did it"), as well as arrogant ("If I can't figure out a natural process today, then nobody else ever will, so let's just say God did it").

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
The fact is that both theories are fantastic claims with no real convincing evidence supporting them.

Frankly I don't see any evidence one way or the other. I see a lot of arguments for one way or the other, and even if something like creating life in a lab (an unaccomplished hypothetical feat) were to happen, it really doesn't convince me that the first cell on life just happened, or that it was made.
Do you dispute that amino acids can be created in the lab?

Do you dispute that amino acids have been found on meteorites?

Do you dispute that proteins have been created from amino acids in the lab?

ArtificialGrape is offline