3 ms·
I am arguing that the orgin-of-life is special case -- it is not like trying to explain where thunder comes from -- and I am completely happy to bite the bullet
by jononomo 4y ago
I am arguing that the orgin-of-life is special case -- it is not like trying to explain where thunder comes from -- and I am completely happy to bite the bullet on the god-of-the-gaps question when it comes to the origin of life. We're 70 years past the Miller-Urey experiment and the gap has only grown wider. If I write a book on this subject it will be called "The God of the Gap".
- ncmncm 4y agoAnd when abiogenesis is finally worked out, your god vanishes in a puff of unreality? If I were going to pick a god to believe in, I would demand sterner stuff than that. But I here predict that when abiogenesis is solved, you will pivot immediately to a now-diminished god inventing amino acids with innate capacity for evolving life. From there, to carbon; and then hydrogen, and its propensity to make stars that eventually go supernova (for the first few rows of the periodic table) and collapse to neutron stars (that collide to make the rest). It will be a god of Hydrogen. Or maybe of Quarks, Leptons, and Photons, though that seems a little messy. Maybe the devil gets to do Dark Matter?
- jononomo 4y agoAbsolutely not -- if abiogenesis is solved then I'll be happy to capitulate. My entire argument is based on the fact that abiogenesis cannot be solved within a materialistic/naturalistic framework. If you do it, then you win.