origin of life (The atheist delusion)

by dhw, Tuesday, March 04, 2008, 07:43 (6107 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George Jelliss draws our attention to Steve Jones's comments on the failure of the latest clay crystal theory of abiogenesis. "But he mentions that several other hypotheses are still in the running....'Some say that it all started in boiling oceans, others on icecaps, and everyone disagrees ... loudly.' This is a good sign that research is vigorous." Yes indeed, and it is also a sign that so far it hasn't made much progress. - George writes: "The research being undertaken in abiogenesis is trying to analyse the natural processes that could have led to the evolution of self-replicating systems. If this can be shown...intelligence will have shown that no pre-existing intelligence is needed." Is trying...could have led...If... From an atheist point of view, you might just as well say: "The research is trying to find a way to prove that life and reproduction could have originated without the intervention of any kind of intelligence. If this can be shown, it will prove that life and reproduction could have originated without any kind of intelligence." Put that way, however, it doesn't sound quite so impressive. Why can't you just wait until the proof is there before you sneer at those who have not committed themselves to unproven hypotheses and so are prepared to consider alternatives? I am strongly reminded of the following comment made earlier on the forum: "The speculations, like those of the string theorists, are certainly interesting and might have something in them, but so far lack definite results." A good enough reason for that particular writer not to commit himself to belief. The comment was not aimed at abiogenesis, though. It was George Jelliss brushing off Pim van Lommel's research into the nature of consciousness and near death experiences.