RE: Chemical Origin of Life
October 15, 2012 at 2:21 pm
(This post was last modified: October 15, 2012 at 2:22 pm by Cyberman.)
If you leave a plate of sausages unattended on a table in a room with a dog, then return to find an empty plate and a guilty-looking dog, clearly it makes more sense to suspect the dog than the race of invisible pixies that may or more likely may not live in your carpet. Similarly, since life - at least as we know it - is based on DNA, a self-replicating molecule, it makes a great deal more sense to look for a chemical origin than a magic one. In other words, per Occam's Razor, it's far more reasonable, and with a greater probability of being right, to go with the evidence at hand, and which can be found, than to reach around for the most unlikely explanations simply because they may feel better.
Let's make it easy and consult someone who actually follows the science on this stuff:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ElUjXxnTOo?rel=0
Let's make it easy and consult someone who actually follows the science on this stuff:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ElUjXxnTOo?rel=0
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
