RE: Why does science always upstage God?
December 23, 2017 at 9:53 pm
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2017 at 9:55 pm by Whateverist.)
(December 23, 2017 at 8:59 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: I notice ignoramus would rather spend time handing out kudos than actually address anything I've asked him, what a coward.
(December 23, 2017 at 7:07 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: A demonstration of Abiogenesis is required to believe that it is how life started. Nobody is saying Abiogenesis is absolutely how life began, so no faith is required, it's simply a hypothesis.
You absolutely ARE saying that abiogenisis is how life began IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN A CREATOR! So unless you are of the opinion that life has always existed (which again there is no evidence of), then by eliminating the possibility that life had a creator, you accept abiogenesis (life from non-life) by default.
To say abiogenesis is "how life began" doesn't really provide an explanation of how life began. It merely asserts our confidence that the answer will turn out to be natural, no magic required.
To say 'god' created life says even less. As with abiogenesis, it provides no clue as to how this god thing created life. But it asserts that you expect the answer to involve a kind of magic that takes any possibility of an explanation permanently off the table. It asserts your contentment with never understanding how life began.
