Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
No 'Creator' Needed for Life to Appear in the Universe
Scientists recently published the results of a new analysis, showing that the appearance life has here on Earth may be inscribed in the very laws of nature and reality. This, the team says, happens because of the way life is coded to emerge and develop, and also due to its basic components.
A mathematical analysis of the ingredients needed to obtain precursor chemicals for basic lifeforms has demonstrated that deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a compound that is destined to occur any place it can occur.
There are serious reasons to support such a claim, the group reveals. First of all, it's very important to know what DNA is made of. Its basic constituents are 2 amino-acids, the basic building blocks of life, combinations of which also produce proteins and enzymes.
Of these 20 amino-acids, 10 can form in a variety of combinations to produce prebiotic lifeforms, that are not very complex, but which can be defined as living, to some extent. The fate of the other ten is even more rigorously planned.
It would appear that these molecules can appear anywhere the thermodynamical balance of the environment is suitable. Therefore, it makes no difference if the conditions are met here, on Venus, or on the recently-discovered, Earth-analog planet Gliese 581g.
This was proven in the new mathematical model, which was developed as an energy analysis by the director of the McMaster University Origins Institute, theoretical astrophysicist Ralph Pudritz.
He shows in the new work that 10 of the amino-acids can effortlessly form at low temperatures and pressures. In other words, it looks that the laws of physics can put life together easily.
This discovery is nothing but bad news for religions that try to pin the origin of life on a Creator. The study shows that this is not needed in order for life to appear, here or elsewhere in the Universe, Daily Galaxy reports.
The implications that this work has for the way we look at the Cosmos are also mind-boggling. If the equations check out, then we could find ourselves living in a galaxy where life abounds.
Naturally, that is no guarantee that advanced, intelligent lifeforms exist nearby, or even at all, but the work does solve some long-standing, mostly-philosophical debates about the origin and spread of life.
Now I'm no scientist..But I don't see how they can come to such a conclusion based off this..Last time I check they haven't made life in a lab. Opinions?
One thing that stood out is their assumption that "This discovery is nothing but bad news for religions that try to pin the origin of life on a Creator. The study shows that this is not needed in order for life to appear, here or elsewhere in the Universe, Daily Galaxy reports. ".
The 'study' does nothing to show why the laws, the matter, or the conditions exist. The problem for scientists isn't in showing that life can exist, it is showing why there is anything instead of nothing. Although I agree with your uncertainty as well - I've never heard of life being spontaneously produced in a lab... ever.
-- Josh
“When you see a man with a great deal of religion displayed in his shop window, you may depend upon it, he keeps a very small stock of it within” C.H. Spurgeon
1st Corinthians 1:17- "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel””not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power"
What's the source? That looks more like agenda driven journalism than anything that would be published even in a scientific context.
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
These type of things usually defeat themselves in their own foolishness. It didn't even take three sentences for this one to do it.
This, the team says, happens because of the way life is coded to emerge and develop, and also due to its basic components.
Life is coded?
That is like saying that Windows 7 exists because software is coded to emerge and develop, and due to its basic components.
A mathematical analysis of the ingredients needed to obtain precursor chemicals for basic lifeforms has demonstrated that deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a compound that is destined to occur any place it can occur.
Destined? This is a philosophical statement.
-“The Bible treated allegorically becomes putty in the hands of the exegete.” John Walvoord
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious
There is a big difference between the formation of amino acids and the formation of even the simplest living organism. They been trying to establish this for a long time. Nothing new here.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
The author of the article seems to be very much unaware of the ideas of theistic evolution and the fine-tuning arguement.
Plus, the wording seems to suggest that scientists have discovered how abiogenesis occurs though they don't actually say that. It's just an Atheist making an old arguement.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
This merely shows life can exist, which we don't need scientists to tell us. If God created life, it makes sense that he would do it by making a universe that results naturally in life, the same way he created the force of gravity to hold us to the earth.
As an atheist myself, I am always baffled by scientists and reporters who think any scientific discovery could be evidence for the absence of God. An all-powerful being can create the earth in six days complete with belly buttons, fully-grown trees, fossils, and layers of sediment. Science long ago proved that the world does not appear to be the one described in Genesis, e.g. the apparent age of the sun, moon, and stars conflicts with the Biblical timeline. But did the God of Genesis create undivided chick cells, unhatched eggs or winged birds? It only makes sense that he would create half-decayed carbon-14 and cosmic microwave background radiation.
The debate over religion will be much more rewarding when science ceases to be considered.
tomkitch2 wrote:This merely shows life can exist, which we don't need scientists to tell us. If God created life, it makes sense that he would do it by making a universe that results naturally in life, the same way he created the force of gravity to hold us to the earth.
As an atheist myself, I am always baffled by scientists and reporters who think any scientific discovery could be evidence for the absence of God. An all-powerful being can create the earth in six days complete with belly buttons, fully-grown trees, fossils, and layers of sediment. Science long ago proved that the world does not appear to be the one described in Genesis, e.g. the apparent age of the sun, moon, and stars conflicts with the Biblical timeline. But did the God of Genesis create undivided chick cells, unhatched eggs or winged birds? It only makes sense that he would create half-decayed carbon-14 and cosmic microwave background radiation.
The debate over religion will be much more rewarding when science ceases to be considered.
With all due respect you have no clue what you're talking about. This very website was founded on the premise that there is complete harmony between the Genesis account and science. Please read some of the articles on the main page.
Let us proclaim the mystery of our faith: Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.
Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Byblos wrote:
With all due respect you have no clue what you're talking about. This very website was founded on the premise that there is complete harmony between the Genesis account and science. Please read some of the articles on the main page.
But that is an extremely minority position. Most people, including most Christians, who read Genesis, see a conflict with science. This would suggest that even if it is not correct, his position is a reasonable one.
Also, are you suggesting that evolution is not science?
Byblos wrote:
With all due respect you have no clue what you're talking about. This very website was founded on the premise that there is complete harmony between the Genesis account and science. Please read some of the articles on the main page.
But that is an extremely minority position. Most people, including most Christians, who read Genesis, see a conflict with science. This would suggest that even if it is not correct, his position is a reasonable one.
Also, are you suggesting that evolution is not science?
Evolution when used narrowly is science. Evolution when it goes beyond direct observation and measurement then transcends into the realm of Philosophy and Religion, and part of the issue I have at times with the use of the term is that because it is also used in the realm of science the two are easily confused.
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
