This is far from a religious doctrine where you bluntly have to follow the written words of a 1600 year old book, Don't dare to be critical about these texts, follow an old grey man orating or believe in an upper being in the sky controlling us all!
This can be applied to Origin of Species, except being 1/10th that age. Don't question the idea of Primordial Soup; follow the old grey man orating in front of the chalkboard.
No, it is absolutely NOT apply-able as i already explained above, in the first paragraph which you conveniently ignored..... It's not "an old grey man orating in front of the chalkboard" or the blind following of the texts of "origin of species", its a motherfucking scientific process which is constantly being criticized, debated, sourced, revised and improved.....By the smartest and brightest individuals, institutions and parties all over the globe. A method which has been applied to all goddamn human scientific progress over our history and brought us way, way further as mankind then any religion ever has.....
Just because you are to stupid to understand how science works, does not make it comparable to a goddamn religious doctrine!
Anyway this sums up how i feel this discussion will go, no matter what is presented to you.
Anyway this sums up how i feel this discussion will go, no matter what is presented to you.
Nah I'm coming at it from the other direction. Much of evolutionary theory (such as natural selection) is perfectly valid observation, but there are some serious gaps. One of those gaps is how we got to self-replicating DNA in the first place. The best answer we have for how that came about has been a 'volcanic tide pool struck by lightning formed some amino acids'. Miller managed to create the molecular Lego blocks of life, and that was good science (at the time1 ). What is not good science is the part where we lazily handwave 'and eventually these amino acids form a strand of DNA'. It is a very "draw the rest of the owl" kind of answer, akin to hoping that you can build a Von Neumann machine out of Legos by shaking a bucket for a few billion years. Natural selection can't help you at this stage because there's no replication happening; any protein chains that start forming are vulnerable to one step forward, two steps back.
1 The mix of atmospheric gasses which Miller was using no longer lines up with modern models about the early-Earth atmosphere, but of course he couldn't know that in 1952. Supposedly re-running the experiment with an updated mixture yields compounds that destroy amino acids.
No, its simple logical chance calculation Billions times billions times billions times billions times billions etc etc etc in a very hostile world. which makes it scientific speculation based on logic, observation and scientific sources. It can and has also be revised when other evidence or more feesible theories arise. It's how science works.
This is far from a religious doctrine where you bluntly have to follow the written words of a 1600 year old book, Don't dare to be critical about these texts, follow an old grey man orating or believe in an upper being in the sky controlling us all!