(January 20, 2015 at 12:23 pm)JuliaL Wrote:(January 20, 2015 at 12:09 pm)Chas Wrote: No, Snowy got that one right.
Only if you don't consider panspermia.
I don't seriously consider it since it adds little or nothing to the discussion of the origin of life.
Quote:But using the 4.5 billion year number leads me to believe that snowtracks is (again) being particularly obtuse or knowingly disinguous (lying). The oldest rocks on earth are pretty close to 4.5B old, but nobody thinks that DNA could have formed or survived on earth that long ago. As pointed out above, planetary scale impacts were occurring making the proto-earth God-Awful hot. But the evidence I've seen has DNA being formed circa 3.8B ago. That gives earth a 700,000,000 year cooling off period. That's a really long time for snowtracks to ignore. It takes that special skill of the faithful to remain knowledgeably ignorant.
I don't know what point Snowy was trying to make. Even the blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.