(January 4, 2018 at 8:40 am)alpha male Wrote:(January 4, 2018 at 1:36 am)Astreja Wrote: Ah! Found a good starting point.
Miller, S.L. A Production of Amino Acids under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions. Science, 117(3046), 528-529.
There are dozens of starting points. None of them are particularly good until they lead to an ending point. We don't have any ending points.
(January 3, 2018 at 9:38 pm)Whateverist Wrote: For me it isn't about the strength of peer reviewed research regarding abiogenesis.
That's good, because the strength is lacking. Yet, many atheists think it's all but proven, because they get their info from youtube and only pay lip service to perr reviewed science.
It doesn't matter to me if the abiogenesis question is answered definitively in my lifetime or not, it'd be great if it was, but I don't need it or expect it to be, as with many other areas of science. I know you don't like the idea, but science does indeed take time, building incrementally in little steps on what came before. And since this is trying to reverse engineer life from the bottom up... based on first principles and hypotheses of the early conditions of the earth... of course it's going to take time and of course there are going to be a lot of misses... because it's hypothetical... but failures can be just as informative as successes so hit or miss, the body of knowledge will gradually grow on the subject, even if it's only a protein or amino acid at a time.
If I was ever to become a Christian again, it could never be as a creationist... the ship has already sailed on that... I'd have to go the 'allegorical' route, because as I see it, creationists have much bigger fish to fry than ignoring the scientific process and the nature and complexity of the task regarding Abiogenesis research; like trying to fit dinosaurs into the ark, both physically and in terms of the narrative. I can just imagine Noah trying to lure a T-Rex onto the ark, but that's all I can do, imagine it... there's no way I could ever believe it.