(November 21, 2013 at 5:40 am)Aractus Wrote: Why don't you try answering my questions? If abiogenesis exists, then it exists as a law of physics (regardless of whether it requires specific starting conditions), why did you say it isn't one? Why did you claim that the laws of physics and chemistry are separate, implying they're not dependant, co-dependant, etc, upon each other which would imply that you predict the same laws of chemistry to exist in a universe with arbitrary laws of physics, etc?
Simple: we don't know what caused abiogenesis, or the conditions behind it. It could be a product of chemistry, but that's no more a law of anything than any other chemical reaction. It's an effect, not the reason for the effect. Gravity is the attraction of objects with mass toward larger ones; that doesn't mean that every individual falling object is its own law of gravity for X.
Besides, that's even assuming the event has a chemical cause; since we don't have an answer yet, asserting anything about it to be true based on incomplete information is just guessing; that's why I don't go around claiming what abiogenesis should be producing.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
