Theoretical origin of life; lipid containers (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, May 04, 2019, 18:59 (1819 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: As for cellular reactions which I have studied and understand, they all have the regular appearance of automaticity. There is no proof here is intelligence guiding them. Intelligent instructions are all that is required.

dhw: You have admitted that they have the “regular appearance” of intelligence (50/50), but of course we do not have the proof – if we did, the hypothesis would be a fact. You have no proof that they are guided by a 3.8-billion-year-old computer programme which you prefer to gloss over as “intelligent instructions”.

DAVID: The only evidence of planning intelligence is in humans.

dhw: Even you have admitted that our fellow animals are intelligent. I don’t know why you insist on inserting “planning” but see my post under “Bacterial intelligence”.

Planning for future needs requires a planning mind a concept presented many times.

DAVID: As to your quoting M,M,S, and A, just as I'm quoting opinion that is all either of us has. I've gone beyond reasonable doubt. Have you?

dhw: Yes, we both quote opinions, but reasonable versus unreasonable is pure subjectivity. My subjective view is that your belief in the design argument for God and in the specialness of humans is reasonable, your opinion that cells are automatons is nowhere near beyond reasonable doubt, and your proposal that your God specially designed every life form etc, and did so in order to make them eat or not each other until he specially designed the only thing he wanted to design is unreasonable, especially since you yourself have no idea why he would come up with such a method.

You constantly come back to my simple acceptance of God's choice of method as somehow lacking substance. We see the evolutionary history as evidence of how it was done. What more do you need? I can only think of direct creation or evolution as possibilities. Do you know of a third way?