(October 30, 2014 at 2:29 pm)Heywood Wrote:(October 30, 2014 at 11:43 am)Esquilax Wrote: For the former, Heywood said early on that abiogenesis is an irrational thing to believe in, as it has never been observed.
I never said abiogenesis is an irrational thing to believe in as it has never been observed.
Neither have the majority of murders.
Yet we are able to examine them after the fact, and determine, with a high level of certainty, the method of death, the type of weapon, time of death, etc, etc.
The only thing necessary to make abiogenesis more rational to believe as the source of life, as compared to a god, is that it has natural explanations for every step and does not break any laws.
The fact that we don't have the exact way it occurred on earth, does not mean we don't have a way it could have happened. There is no need to add a step in the process for 'magic'.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
