The universe began in total chaos (a zero state) from which the first complex particles self-organized.
Biology is a result of Abiogenesis, where purely chemical dynamics resulted in biochemical molecules which then evolved into living organisms with sensory abilities provided by the simplest possible data processor, i.e. the microtubule, which forms the cytoskeleton of all living organisms in existence.
(even in a protoform in Prokaryotic organisms).
You need to read Robert Hazen if you haven’t had a chance yet.
He explains the abiogenetic process in clear unambiguous terms.
The grand and intertwined tale of Earth’s living and non-living spheres is just now coming into focus. Robert M. Hazen clues us into our planet’s 4.5-billion-year saga of dramatic physical, chemical and biological transformations, and explains how the co-evolution of life and rocks unfolded in an irreversible sequence of evolutionary stages.
But he leaves it to you to recognize what his science is suggesting.
Scientists have discovered that a version of the Krebs cycle, the heart of the cellular metabolic network, can take place without the cellular proteins known as enzymes. Since the Krebs cycle does not require cellular proteins to occur, researchers now believe that metabolism may predate life. In fact, spontaneous chemical reactions may have served as the foundation for life on Earth.
“Metabolism” describes the web of chemical reactions that maintain the living state of cells and organisms. This includes both reactions that synthesize amino acids and lipids that cells need and reactions that break down molecules to generate energy. Cells use lipids and amino acids in membranes and proteins and to create the molecules that are consumed to generate energy. …
[
John Rennie, October 12, 2020
Popular speculations about how life evolved out of a soup of chemicals on the early Earth often focus on the origins of DNA and RNA, the molecules of genetic information. But the genesis of genes is only one of the mysteries that origin-of-life theories must reckon with. Another is the rise of metabolism — the biochemical processes inside cells that make life possible by continuously drawing energy from the environment and directing it into the assembly of vital molecules. It’s a complex problem on which there has been little headway.
But scientists may have just turned an important corner in that search. Today in Nature Chemistry, researchers at Furman University and the Scripps Research Institute announced a discovery about how one of the most important parts of cellular metabolism might have come to be. The researchers showed that, elaborate as that chemical mechanism is in cells today, nearly all the ingredients for a potential forerunner to it could have formed easily from just two simple organic compounds reacting in water. …
My morning shift started with watching mom tucking Li’l G back into bed after a couple hours of restless wakefulness (schedules are made to be broken), that I was blissfully unaware of, so it’s a second cup of coffee and relaxing peek at what’s happening at CFI
[write4u, post:460, topic:7725]
Well, ID has been debunked in the Kitzmiller trial …
There is no irreducible complexity and therefore no need for intelligent design.
[Hammond… Kurvature 66]
Careful there W4u, Dembski has 7 PhD’s.
… What he knows that you don’t know, is the same thing the Vatican knows, that all people are at different terminal levels on the human growth curve. And they know that this causes more fully grown people to have superior perception, because their subjective reality is closer to objective reality.
… Genius Dembski realizes that anything “created” by someone very high on the growth curve, whether it’s Michelangelo, Beethoven, Newton or Einstein may be considered “intelligent design” or something that has "irreducible complexity". IOW lesser grown people are unable to comprehend the origin of it, therefore refer to it as having “irreducible complexity” !!!
… I’ve got to hand it to Dembski, he really had amateurs on the run for a while, but of course he’s still dealing with “perceptual analogy” not an actual hard science proof..
… But history will show that the real problem with trying to prove scientifically that there is a God, is that it takes thousands of researchers testing millions of people to actually do it. And even then, after they get all through and the data is in, and they discover the gleaming, top, lone, final eigenvector, they name it the "general factor of psychology" a.k.a. the “GFP”. This is because ordinary psychometry researchers don’t have sufficient education, like Dembski, or Hammond, to recognize that the GFP is the God of the Bible! And those thousands of researchers sweating worldwide on desktop computers for 50 years, are the scientific army who ACTUALLY PROVED IT.
GH
[quote=“kurvature66, post:471, topic:7725”]
Careful there W4u, Dembski has 7 PhD’s.
… What he knows that you don’t know, is the same thing the Vatican knows, that all people are at different terminal levels on the human growth curve. And they know that this causes more fully grown people to have superior perception, because their subjective reality is closer to objective reality .
I guess he has the power to overrule this:
Apparently, Dembski never heard that the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has conceded that evolution is true, which automatically debunks the entire creation myth of Adam as the first hominid species and by extension Intelligent Design (irreducible complexity).
Pope Francis declares evolution and Big Bang theory are real and God is not ‘a magician with a magic wand’
Francis goes against Benedict XVI’s apparent support for ‘intelligent design’ - but does hail his predecessor’s ‘great contribution to theology’
The theories of evolution and the Big Bang are real and God is not “a magician with a magic wand”, [Pope Francis] has declared.
Speaking at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the Pope made comments which experts said put an end to the “pseudo theories” of creationism and intelligent design that some argue were encouraged by his predecessor Pope Benedict XVI.
Care to edit that word-salad and put it in context of debates on fora that have several participants and a poster neglects to mention who he is addressing.
[write4u, post:473, topic:7725]
… [kurvature66, post:471, topic:7725]
Careful there W4u, Dembski has 7 PhD’s.
… What he knows that you don’t know, is the same thing the Vatican knows, that all people are at different terminal levels on the human growth curve. And they know that this causes more fully grown people to have superior perception, because their subjective reality is closer to objective reality .
[W4u]
Apparently, Dembski never heard that the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has conceded that evolution is true, which automatically debunks the entire creation myth of Adam as the first hominid species and by extension Intelligent Design (irreducible complexity).
[Hammond… Kurvature 66]
… Look, the “creation myth” of the Bible describes the advent of human reality NOT “physical reality”.
… The Big Bang And Evolution are events that took place in “physical reality" NOT "human reality”.
… The entire Bible is a metaphorical and allegorical description of "human reality" NOT physical reality.
… “God”, is a perceptual (mental) phenomenon of Man, God is NOT a physical phenomena of the real physical world, He only subjectively appears to be so to human beings and other higher animals animals, simply because 15% of our brain (on average) is actually missing because of the human growth curve deficit!
GH
[write4u, post:479, topic:7725] …[kurvature66, post:475, topic:7725]
… “God”, is a perceptual (mental) phenomenon of Man, God is NOT a physical phenomena of the real physical world,
[Write4u]
Well, thank you, at last some clarity. God is not real, period.
The rest is just drama.
[Hammond… kurvature 66] WRONG, dead wrong! !
… If all life perished tomorrow, physical reality would no longer exist: Because you cannot define the word “exists” without a human observer. The ONLY way the existence of so-called “physical reality” can be defined is that “a human observer confirms that it exists”. If there is no such thing as a “human observer” then it cannot be confirmed by any means whatsoever that “physical reality” exists !!
… It is not true that the moon does not cease to exist if you look the other way, however the moon “does cease to exist” if all human observers are dead !
… Therefore, the fact that Man (inconveniently) possesses a mental phenomenon called “God” (because his phenotype does not equal his genotype) causes all human observational capacity to constantly observe that a “real God” exists in physical reality!
… When you finally comprehend that, you can start playing with the big boys!
GH
