Originally Posted by CTD
In retrospect, I think I may have wrritten this too quickly.
Quote
Just look how many pathways they're exploring. That's because the earlier pathways they thought would work are failing. They're not getting closer, they're searching for more new alternatives. Just look at that very article. Look at how crazy some of that stuff is, if you don't think they're getting desperate. I don't dispute the results of their tests, why would I? What I don't have is blind, unlimited faith that somehow, some day, they'll pull it off.


If everyone is to understand, I need to a better job of making this clear.

The wiki article we've been discussing divulges some key information.

There are avenues which have been largely abandoned: Miller's experiments, Fox's experiments, Eigen's hypothesis.

There are several avenues being investigated: Wächtershäuser's hypothesis, Radioactive beach theory, "Genes first" models: the RNA world, "Metabolism first" models: iron-sulfur world and others (which appears = Wächtershäuser's hypothesis, but they felt it needed to be listed twice), Bubble Theory, Autocatalysis, Clay theory, "Deep-hot biosphere" model of Gold, Lipid World, Polyphosphate model, PAH world hypothesis, and references to others.

Now I concede that I may have missed some overlap, but for the most part, advocates of any one model have rejected all the others. DNA worlders reject RNA world & vice-versa. I'll assume they all accept the "somehow someway it had to happen" article of faith, but other than that, I agree with much of what they believe. Many of them reject the RNA world model - so do I. Many reject the Clay theory model - so do I.

The article plainly states "There is no truly "standard model" of the origin of life." Who can disagree? If the mainstream could pick a horse in this race, they surely would. History indicates they'd back it with propaganda and take measures to eliminate the competition. They'd cut off funds, media access, and all other support to the extent they could get away with it. They'd publicly denounce them as "unscientific", and slander their jockeys. But they can't even pick a horse that they think could win a rigged race! That in itself says something about the crippled condition of the stable.
Alright. I've typed up another way to express my main point there, so I might as well post it.

My main point is that creationists are more in agreement with the scientists researching Spontaneous Generation than are evolutionists.

I shall now demonstrate this mathematically. There are several schools of thought about how to create life from non-life. For the sake of simplicity and time, I will discount a few and simply label the schools A, B, C, and D.

I will keep score abbreviating creationist to c and evolutionist to e. For each point of agreement, a point will be added; for each point of disagreement, one will be deducted.

School A believes life came from non-life by means of A. e + 1 c -1
School A believes life could not have come from non-life by means of B. e -1 c + 1
School A believes life could not have come from non-life by means of C. e -1 c + 1
School A believes life could not have come from non-life by means of D. e -1 c + 1

School B believes life came from non-life by means of B. e + 1 c -1
School B believes life could not have come from non-life by means of A. e -1 c + 1
School B believes life could not have come from non-life by means of C. e -1 c + 1
School B believes life could not have come from non-life by means of D. e -1 c + 1

School C believes life came from non-life by means of C. e + 1 c -1
School C believes life could not have come from non-life by means of A. e -1 c + 1
School C believes life could not have come from non-life by means of B. e -1 c + 1
School C believes life could not have come from non-life by means of D. e -1 c + 1

School D believes life came from non-life by means of D. e + 1 c -1
School D believes life could not have come from non-life by means of A. e -1 c + 1
School D believes life could not have come from non-life by means of B. e -1 c + 1
School D believes life could not have come from non-life by means of C. e -1 c + 1

Total score: e -8 c + 8

Creationists agree with the very people researching this stuff on more points than do evolutionists.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson