Science vs. religion (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, February 26, 2009, 13:38 (5545 days ago) @ dhw

You write: "We have different views about abiogenesis, and you take the pessimistic view that science will never be able to explain it." We seem to have a different understanding of the word "abiogenesis", which is defined in all my dictionaries as a theory or hypothesis ... namely, that life can come into being spontaneously from non-living materials. I think you take it only to mean the origin of life. I am sceptical as to whether science will ever be able to prove that life on Earth arose spontaneously (i.e. by accident), though I am not sceptical about the ability of science eventually to find the combinations that led to life. You quote me as saying: "Science can't explain this so science can never do so." I have never said that. - Fortuitously, an article about origin of life popped up today. Dr. Deamer's optimism is so strong, perhaps an 'r' should be slipped into his name. Please note his statement that this research is very,very early in any type of 'discovery' of importance. dhw is correct: a combination of molecules may be found to create a form of life, but I would remind, what we would be watching is intelligent design by lab rat scientists. I've been one myself in the past. There is always optimism that you will prove the point you are researching. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090215151611.htm