Hi to my Forum Friends,
Thank you, TNT, for posting the video: http://kids4truth.com/watchmaker/watch.html on Fish's discussion, Extreme Nerd Rap. It is very well done and useful for teaching.
I was not surprised to see Fish respond with the atheist YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcAq9bmCeR0
So, let's all take a moment to evaluate Fish's entry into this discussion titled: Evolution IS a Blind Watchmaker
The following excerpt is taken from this video, which is not really a video, but instead is an atheist blackboard lesson in laughable theorizing and silly suppositions. It tells us:
The theory of evolution is NOT a theory of life's origin. It is a theory of how one form of life changes over time through mutation and natural selection, into another form.
You obviously confuse the theory of evolution with the theory of abiogenesis, a common creationist mistake.
Okay, for now, I will buy that. Evolution, in their mind, is not about how life began. They suggest we look at another theory called abiogenesis. So, let's take a look at what scientists tell us about abiogenesis.
The following excerpts are from from the Bio-Medicine web site: http://www.bio-medicine.org/biology-definition/Abiogenesis
Excerpt one:
Abiogenesis, in its most general sense, is the hypothetical generation of life from non-living matter. Today, the term is primarily used in the context of biology and the origin of life. Some confusion exists on this topic, because early concepts of abiogenesis were later proven to be incorrect. These early concepts of spontaneous generation (referred to here as "Aristotelian abiogenesis" for clarity) held that living organisms could be "born" out of decaying organic substances, et cetera, which we now know does not occur.
The first step in the scientific refutation of the theory of Aristotelian abiogenesis was taken by the Italian Francesco Redi, who, in 1668, proved that no maggots were bred in meat on which flies were prevented by wire screens from laying their eggs. From the 17th century onwards it was gradually shown that, at least in the case of all the higher and readily visible organisms, spontaneous generation did not occur, but that omne vivum ex ovo, every living thing came from a pre-existing living thing.
The modern definition of abiogenesis is concerned with the formation of the simplest forms of life from primordial chemicals. This is a significantly different thing from the concept of Aristotelian abiogenesis, which postulated the formation of complex organisms. Different hypotheses for modern abiogenetic processes are currently under debate; see, for example, RNA world hypothesis, proteinoid, Miller experiment.
Excerpt two:
Information theorist Hubert Yockey argued that chemical evolutionary research begs the question:
Research on the origin of life seems to be unique in that the conclusion has already been authoritatively accepted … . What remains to be done is to find the scenarios which describe the detailed mechanisms and processes by which this happened.
BILL'S COMMENT: In other words, the theory has absolutely been accepted authoritatively. Now, let's see if we can prove what we already believe to be fact. Duh!
One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written. (Yockey, 1977. A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology 67:377–398, quotes from pp. 379, 396.)
In book he wrote 15 years later, Yockey argued that the primordial soup theory is a failed paradigm:
Although at the beginning the paradigm was worth consideration, now the entire effort in the primeval soup paradigm is self-deception on the ideology of its champions. …
The history of science shows that a paradigm, once it has achieved the status of acceptance (and is incorporated in textbooks) and regardless of its failures, is declared invalid only when a new paradigm is available to replace it.
So, my dear atheist Friends, since the theory of abiogenesis has been disproved by scientists -- please answer one question:
How did life begin? How did life evolve, or poof, or pop out of non-living material?
I will concede, for the sake of this discussion, that evolution is not talking about the origin of life. But, let's move back to that question: What is the origin of life?
I know what I believe: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:10) -- but, I sincerely await your serious, considered answer. What is the origin of life?
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill Gray
billdory@pacbell.net
Alabama bred,
California fed,
Blessed by God to be a Christian American!
Attachments
Original Post