Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 11, 2022, 7:06 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The code that is DNA
RE: The code that is DNA
(January 13, 2020 at 8:49 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: Oh and another issue with you using Harold Morowitz.He was staunchlynchly and an anti creationist and opposed intelligent design and accepted evolution and abiogenesis .

(January 13, 2020 at 8:40 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I've read Morowitz's 'Energy Flow In Biology' (it was assigned reading at uni).  His writing tended to follow Darwin's style, in which he posited how unlikely something was, then went on to demonstrate that it wasn't so unlikely after all (Darwin famously did this with the evolution of the eye).

Morowitz did indeed write what was quoted above, but immediately demolished the idea, because the smallest, simplest form of life wasn't due to chance, but was constrained by chemistry and physics to occur along certain  pathways.  He held a pretty rigid view of the deterministic nature of evolution.  To imply that he believed the formation of life was mathematically impossible is simply quote mining of a particularly vile nature.

Boru
And the fact he accepted  abiogenesis  and evolution .But it wouldn't matter even if he didn't .Science isn't built of celebrity opinions in books .It's built of peer review and convincing consensus your right .IDiots fail his hard .

Ayup, he was an evolutionist, pure and simple.

At the end of the day, this is really all creationists have got - straw men and quote mining.

Boru
‘Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.’ Ralph Waldo Emerson
RE: The code that is DNA
(January 13, 2020 at 9:35 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(January 13, 2020 at 8:49 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: Oh and another issue with you using Harold Morowitz.He was staunchlynchly and an anti creationist and opposed intelligent design and accepted evolution and abiogenesis .

And the fact he accepted  abiogenesis  and evolution .But it wouldn't matter even if he didn't .Science isn't built of celebrity opinions in books .It's built of peer review and convincing consensus your right .IDiots fail his hard .

Ayup, he was an evolutionist, pure and simple.

At the end of the day, this is really all creationists have got - straw men and quote mining.

Boru
And using research and scientist who laugh at their cavemen nonsense.Accept our he's simply a an ignorant propagandist .
“The sun from far gives life. But get close to it and it burns anything down to ashes”

[Image: flag-ukraine_1f1fa-1f1e6.png]  Heart [Image: canada-google.png]        

 “No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM


      
RE: The code that is DNA
Administrator Notice
Closing this thread pending staff review.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Are humans half aliens? Human DNA question Signa92 14 1066 December 30, 2018 at 12:34 am
Last Post: Rahn127
Brick Atheist moral code Void 45 13608 March 24, 2015 at 8:14 pm
Last Post: I Am Not A Human Being



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)