Apologetics is bad for Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-02-2014, 09:25 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 09:21 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  I did not know that they had the atmosphere wrong
Why not? Where did you learn that he had it right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 09:34 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 08:02 AM)alpha male Wrote:  I agree. It wasn't a waste of time testing it. It is, however, a waste of time for people to later cite it as if it's relevant. Unfortunately, things like U-M are still taught in textbooks and the mass media. Instead of being mad at me for calling you out on it, you should be mad at those who continue to teach it without noting that it's no longer relevant.

...or maybe it *is* still relevant, and that's why it's still discussed. You haven't explained why it isn't relevant. You've simply picked nits on the very first experiment in the series, ignoring the rest.

Quote:Miller noted problems with the RNA world hypothesis before his death, but it isn't stopping people from wasting their careers on the same endeavour.

Miller was a brilliant and dedicated scientist, but his failure to find nucleotides in his experiments is not the end of investigation. Why would it be? That isn't how science works. Powner, Gerland, and Sutherland published the results of an experiment they performed, in which activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides were in fact formed under conditions designed to mimic a pre-biotic earth, so the RNA world hypothesis is far from dead.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like toadaly's post
27-02-2014, 09:48 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 03:12 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  But in case you don't understand the scientific method:

Just because the original experiment did not accurately replicate the Earth's atmosphere, does not mean to say that it is now irrelevant, it shows how organic compounds grow in complexity given an influx of free-energy. And we cannot disregard the experiment if we find out that panspermia is true and that life did not originate on Earth. Why? Because it broadens our understanding of the underlying mechanisms involved in abiogenesis.

Science is a search and if your hypothesis is shown to be wrong, it does not mean to say that it was a waste of time testing it. It needed to be demonstrated as being incorrect so as it allows us to come up with new hypotheses that can be tested that may be correct.

For example Einstein spent the last part of his career trying to demonstrate that quantum mechanics was not random. He failed. But he admitted himself that if he could not demonstrate it then it would stop younger scientists from wasting their careers on the same endeavour.

That's the part where you are fine with allowing evidence to affect your world view and are willing to change your world view based on evidence. This is, of course, far superior to assuming that something you read in a book somewhere is right, and refusing to budge after the fact.

This thread will never get anywhere beyond where it is because of that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
27-02-2014, 09:52 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
Now that alpha got pwned he will run away like a pussy to show up some other place some other time and write bunch of stupid things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 10:10 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 09:52 AM)donotwant Wrote:  Now that alpha got pwned he will run away like a pussy to show up some other place some other time and write bunch of stupid things.

He's too stupid, and too arrogant, to recognize or admit that he got pwned. He'll keep swinging wildly like a drunk in a bar fight, ever more sure that he's right about...well, everything he's ever said. In his mind, he's that one unique individual who has never been wrong.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 10:32 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 09:34 AM)toadaly Wrote:  ...or maybe it *is* still relevant, and that's why it's still discussed. You haven't explained why it isn't relevant. You've simply picked nits on the very first experiment in the series, ignoring the rest.
I've explained why it isn't relevant repeatedly - the atmosphere they used is no longer considered to have actually existed on the early earth.
Quote:Miller was a brilliant and dedicated scientist, but his failure to find nucleotides in his experiments is not the end of investigation. Why would it be? That isn't how science works.
I don't know - ask Mathilda, it was her position. This is an all-too-common tag-team tactic.
Quote:That isn't how science works. Powner, Gerland, and Sutherland published the results of an experiment they performed, in which activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides were in fact formed under conditions designed to mimic a pre-biotic earth, so the RNA world hypothesis is far from dead.
That's nice. Far from dead isn't alive though. Unless you think these are life, you have another instance of scientists taking some chemicals and turning them into others. "...the conditions of the synthesis are consistent with potential early-Earth geochemical models" sounds weaselly to me, but I don't care enough to pay to read the details. Too bad scientific knowledge isn't free.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 10:53 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 10:32 AM)alpha male Wrote:  I've explained why it isn't relevant repeatedly - the atmosphere they used is no longer considered to have actually existed on the early earth.

And I've explained repeatedly why it is relevant. The experiment shows that organic compounds can grow in complexity in an environment consisting of naturally occurring chemicals and an input of free-energy. This is relevant for us to understand the underlying mechanisms involved for life to form, not just as we know it but also the whole space of possibilities.

If it was not relevant then scientists would not have proceeded to perform many different variations of the experiment since then.

If we could not show ways in which organic compounds can grow in complexity then we would be coming up with increasingly different hypotheses to explain how life started.

It is not just interesting regarding abiogenesis on Earth, but also to help provide evidence as to whether panspermia is the cause for life on Earth, also where we should be looking for life in the solar system and to help determine the abundance of life in the galaxy.

Also, we don't even know whether life originated on Earth's surface. Some theorise that life started on the sea floor near hydrothermal vents. Because we do not know where life did form, or whether it has formed multiple times or is indeed constantly forming all the time, we need to find out the range of conditions were it can possibly form.

But I have said all this already and am now just repeating myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
27-02-2014, 10:59 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 10:53 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  And I've explained repeatedly why it is relevant. The experiment shows that organic compounds can grow in complexity in an environment consisting of naturally occurring chemicals and an input of free-energy. This is relevant for us to understand the underlying mechanisms involved for life to form, not just as we know it but also the whole space of possibilities.
And I've noted that if you need to go to panspermia, go right ahead. It doesn't play well with people in the middle.
Quote:If it was not relevant then scientists would not have proceeded to perform many different variations of the experiment since then.
Scientists will perform any experiment they can get a grant for.
Quote:If we could not show ways in which organic compounds can grow in complexity then we would be coming up with increasingly different hypotheses to explain how life started.
And we are doing just that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis#Current_models
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 11:20 AM
Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 10:32 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(27-02-2014 09:34 AM)toadaly Wrote:  ...or maybe it *is* still relevant, and that's why it's still discussed. You haven't explained why it isn't relevant. You've simply picked nits on the very first experiment in the series, ignoring the rest.

We're aware you don't understand why the creation of organic compounds from inorganic compounds in a vacuum is relevant to abiogenesis.

Quote:I've explained why it isn't relevant repeatedly - the atmosphere they used is no longer considered to have actually existed on the early earth.
Quote:Miller was a brilliant and dedicated scientist, but his failure to find nucleotides in his experiments is not the end of investigation. Why would it be? That isn't how science works.
I don't know - ask Mathilda, it was her position. This is an all-too-common tag-team tactic.

Whining about debate tactics being used against you when you've entered a debate forum, have repeatedly demanded evidence be provided to you, and refused to submit any evidence whatsoever of your own?

Good old Christian Persecution complex!

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes rampant.a.i.'s post
27-02-2014, 11:28 AM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
alpha male Wrote:Scientists will perform any experiment they can get a grant for.
Now we are getting into conspiracy theories.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: