4 ms·
I think it's hilarious how your article sums up in two sentences exactly what I've been trying to say in 1,000+ words in these comments and succinctly summarize
by kirse 17y ago
I think it's hilarious how your article sums up in two sentences exactly what I've been trying to say in 1,000+ words in these comments and succinctly summarizes why I still remain justly skeptical:
Moreover, efforts to create more life in the labs will eventually hit a philosophical wall, not a technical one. "If somebody makes something great in the lab, it's fantastic. But really the origin of life on Earth is an historical problem that we're never going to be able to witness and verify," he says.
- whughes 17y agoIt can't be 100% verified, but that doesn't mean that the theory of evolution holds no water. Being "skeptical" doesn't mean ignoring the evidence for things you don't like. It's the most likely explanation at the moment, backed up by evidence and the experiments we can do. Thus, for the time being, we accept it. It's not a tablet handed down by God, but it's not ignorable just because we're not cocksure.
- billswift 17y agoThat is known as the "argument from ignorance" - since we don't know for certain, anything is equally likely.