Theoretical origin of life; new earliest? (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, October 13, 2017, 15:31 (2377 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Friday, October 13, 2017, 15:38

dhw: There is a continuum between the origin of life and Darwin’s random mutations or your 3.8-billion-year computer programme or my autonomous inventive mechanism (cellular intelligence). The agnostic Darwin never committed himself to an atheistic theory concerning the origin of life. Here is the warm pond reference:

Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'? - Scientific ...
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtomics/did-life-evolve...

"But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity etcetera present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed [..] " Darwin, Letter to Joseph Hooker (1871)

I've read this letter before.

dhw: A “big if”. And does it not occur to you that if God did create life, he would have had to assemble all the ingredients in a suitable location on Earth?

Recent commentary suggests multiple spots, which really makes good sense.

xxxxxx
QUOTE (re “blind cave fish”):"Shuker is suspicious of some efforts to promote the idea of an “extended evolutionary synthesis”. He thinks some people are trying sneak religious ideas back into evolutionary theory." (DAVID’s bold)

DAVID’s comment: Once again we see the battle between atheistic Neo-Darwin defenders and those who champion epigenetics as a definitive adaptive mechanism that might represent religious ideas. This applies directly to our discussion about Darwinists and atheism. Random mutation and natural selection for them obviously denies God.

dhw: I am not disputing that atheists use evolutionary theory to support their atheism. Once more: I am disputing your claim that Darwin’s theory of random mutations and natural selection “dismisses God out of hand”. It is the atheistic interpretation that dismisses God out of hand. Since you appear to agree, I suggest we leave it at that.

Thank you for your review of Darwin and your view of him. We shall leave it at that since we interpret him in different ways. By the way I was able to review the article you had trouble getting, by Googling the title of the article you presented.