A New Chemical 'Tree of The Origins of Life'

Exactly.

My hypothesis is that IDcreationism is a product of weak faith. Its proponents appear to be completely blind to the way that it severely diminishes the fundamental Christian view of God, turning Him into a semi-competent tinkerer.

2 Likes

Vitalists just keep lugging the goalposts. They did the same thing with DNA replication until it was done with purified components in a test tube by Arthur Kornberg’s group.

2 Likes

Yup. And the Bible says that the process extends back through abiogenesis, with the earth bringing forth life.

They did the same thing with DNA replication until it was done with purified components in a test tube by Arthur Kornberg’s group.

Is that so. I never knew. Thanks for the history lesson.

“Abiogenesis” simply means life arising from non-life, whether performed by God or not. God is literally saying that the earth is doing the biogenesis in this verse.

1 Like

I don’t see how it is in vain, as I view my career in biomedical research as one of the most Christian things I’ve done.

Isn’t it amazing that you view biology as heresy that scares you so much that you have to falsely claim familiarity with the evidence?

Why? Do you dispute it?

Can you show me even a single datum that you have personally examined to inform your views about evolutionary biology? If not, why are you demanding that others produce evidence?

TIA.

I was objecting to his swearing not anything else. That’s great regarding your vocation. It’s an important field.

I’m not sure how biology could be a heresy. I’m not that familiar with biology. I just think that OoL research is kind of embarrassing for scientists based on the little I’ve read and listened to.

I was curious which Christians are involved in OoL research as he used it to make a claim. I’m not going to take his word for it. Is that a problem I’d like to know?

I started a thread on this forum wanting to know more. I have a bunch of webpages bookmarked to get to. The subject is fascinating and interesting to me. Especially because surprising things seem to happen. I’m objecting to OoL research involving chemistry not evolutionary biology. I think it’s misguided to apply it to deep time, but otherwise have no problems with it.

I know. I was pointing out that the same sentence can be taken another way, much like many in the Bible. I’m also pointing out your naked tribalism, something Jesus Christ taught against.

It is. IDcreationists contribute nothing of significance to it. Doesn’t that suggest a profound lack of faith in what they are selling to you?

Because evolution is essential for understanding it and you deny evolution without any evidence.

Then how can you so vehemently deny evolution?

I don’t, but then my position is based on evidence, while yours is based on the worst sort of hearsay. Yet you pretend that your position is based on evidence. Why, Valerie?

Then it’s both silly and disingenuous to demand evidence from him, because you’ll just ignore it, right?

The problem is that you won’t take his word for something you want to be true, but you will take hearsay (misrepresented as evidence) for what you wish to be true.

Why not look it up for yourself?

But you don’t really seem to want to know.

Are they hearsay or evidence?

Not “seem,” do. Many of them make far more sense in light of evolution. From my most recent research field, if cardiac myosin was intelligently designed, why are there so many MYH7 alleles in humans, most of which are found in perfectly healthy people? Why are there so few MYH7 alleles in every other species we’ve examined?

Evolution and anthropology explain that very well. How do you explain that evidence? Not anyone else, but you?

Come on. You’re objecting to evolutionary biology too.

I don’t think that your opinion is based on any evidence. I think you’re unwilling to look or think for yourself, which is why you typically resort to pure hearsay from YouTube videos.

2 Likes

Which naked tribalism is that?

I don’t understand what you’re trying to imply or how that applies that they don’t affect your field. I came across this article recently. Study shows a molecular dance that keeps your heart beating | WSU Insider | Washington State University

I thought this part was interesting. I wonder how often scientists accidentally call something designed.

“It’s beautifully designed,” said Kostyukova, whose research is focused on understanding protein structures.

And, tightly regulated.

I deny evolution as a correct origins theory because I believe the Bible is clear that death is the result of sin. I will not believe that animal or human death came before the fall. I will not believe that God is the author of death. I believe the Bible is clear that death is what results when we turn away from God and don’t want to know Him, and what happens when we separate ourselves from Him who is Life.

Are you claiming Dr. James Tour spouts hearsay? I don’t know what you’re basing what you’re saying on. We haven’t really interacted much before so I don’t know how you think you know me.

I think he proves his point if Christians are involved in the research somewhat yes. So no I would not ignore it.

Whose word? What hearsay? I mostly read a very long BBC article on the subject.

Yes I do.

MIT open course webpages. Study Materials | Introduction to Biology | Biology | MIT OpenCourseWare you tell me.

I’d have to understand what it is first. Do you have an article I could read.

No. I’m not. I think it makes a lot of sense. God created us and other life to adapt, and we can, but only so far, and we still die because of sin in our world.

Please state the evidence for this fact.

Its strange I can’t find that interview anymore. The scientist interviewed is a Christian working on the OoL problem. I would have bookmarked it if I knew it would be relevant to today’s discussion. Anyway, I am still searching. If I find it, I will share, otherwise I may retract my statement.

From my most recent research field, if cardiac myosin was intelligently designed, why are there so many MYH7 alleles in humans, most of which are found in perfectly healthy people? Why are there so few MYH7 alleles in every other species we’ve examined?

I would love to know more, please share links to papers discussing this.

I don’t think that your opinion is based on any evidence. I think you’re unwilling to look or think for yourself, which is why you typically resort to pure hearsay from YouTube videos.

@thoughtfdo is not a scientist, so I can understand her preferring to watch YouTube videos on topics like this than reading actual science papers. I tend to watch a lot of YouTube videos on physics than read papers (I most times don’t understand) on it. However, I don’t watch videos of flat-earth physicists trying to debunk already established facts about heliocentrism. I am not saying abiogenesis is solidly established like heliocentrism, but there is some evidence that lends support to it like @Rumraket pointed out.

Tour is smart and accomplished, but he is not the right authority to get your information on OoL. My favorite OoL researcher is Nick Lane, and during his talks he always talks about the progress he’s made and the challenges that remain like all scientists do.

2 Likes

There aren’t any AFAIK. Why would there be? It’s a perfect case to see whether @thoughtful is willing to thoughtfully engage directly with the evidence instead of falsely labeling hearsay as evidence.

But she’s making claims about the evidence from them.

And do you think that you understand physics better than physicists do as a result? If not, it’s not even slightly analogous to what @thoughtful is doing.

And if @thoughtful would take the time to read Lane’s awesome book The Vital Question, she would see that Tour’s description of OOL research is not reality-based.

But she still wouldn’t be dealing with the evidence. I’ve found that actual evidence is something that IDcreationists run away from in favor of hearsay, consistent with weak faith.

1 Like

But she’s making claims about the evidence from them.

This is also my quarrel with her.

And do you think that you understand physics better than physicists do as a result? If not, it’s not even slightly analogous to what @thoughtful is doing.

I certainly don’t understand physics better than actual physicists. I get your point on this.

And if @thoughtful would take the time to read Lane’s awesome book The Vital Question, she would see that Tour’s description of OOL research is not reality-based.

Exactly. When I used to consume creationist literature on abiogenesis, most of the time it was misrepresented, just like evolution. That TalkOrigins article on abiogenesis and Jack Szostack lectures on it clarified a lot for me.

1 Like

I thought this part was interesting. I wonder how often scientists accidentally call something designed.

Evolution is a designer (and you can design by tinkering), so I am not surprised they said so.

I deny evolution as a correct origins theory because I believe the Bible is clear that death is the result of sin.

Biological evolution doesn’t tell us about the origin of life, so if that’s what you meant by “origins”, you are going for a strawman. If you meant something else, please specify next time.

There has always been death. Adam and Eve, since they were humans would have possessed apoptosis genes, which encode proteins that mediate cellular death. In addition, their skin epithelium would have been loaded with dead cells due to keratinization. As long as cellular life existed, so has cellular death.

I will not believe that God is the author of death.

So who gave us apoptosis genes and natural killer cells?

I believe the Bible is clear that death is what results when we turn away from God and don’t want to know Him, and what happens when we separate ourselves from Him who is Life.

No. You can make this case for organismal death, but it falls apart for cellular death. That means there has always been death.

Like this:

They claim that the working scientists are wrong, but if they had any faith in that claim, they’d be doing science instead of generating rhetoric.

Are there any creationist pharma companies?

Another example of you avoiding evidence for hearsay.

Far less often than we deliberately use metaphors. But you’re avoiding evidence.

Then why pretend that your position has anything to do with evidence?

I believe that you are rejecting the greatest commandment to engage in tribalism.

No, I’m stating that as a fact. Does he do any OoL research? Do you even understand the difference between evidence and hearsay? Your question suggests that you don’t.

The fact that you cite hearsay instead of evidence.

Have you modified any of your positions on the basis of evidence presented to you here?

Tour’s, for example.

That would be hearsay, not evidence.

Still mostly hearsay. You limit yourself to hearsay so that you can engage in bothsidesism and ignore the evidence.

It’s not covered in a single article.

How far, according to the evidence?

1 Like

Actually I remember someone sharing an interview that probably was on this topic because I remember listening to the first ten minutes but it was boring so I quit watching. I remembered that later tonight. So I believe you.

1 Like

Just look at this page and the papers that were published in just the last week and try to tell me with a straight face OOL research isn’t progressing:

https://www.nature.com/subjects/origin-of-life

3 Likes

If I want fair and accurate information on a Ford I’m thinking of buying, I probably don’t go to a GM dealer or mechanic. I might avoid going to a Ford salesman, too. But I might go to a mechanic who specialises in Fords.

49 posts were split to a new topic: James Tour and the Origin of Life

40 posts were split to a new topic: The Gospels and Eyewitness Testimony