Well but ID implicitly questions abiogenesis there is nothing about ID that expclity rejects a non-divine model of creation - aliens in theory could work just as well as god for example. What it does challenge directly is the fundamental tenets of evolution. I know a lot of people who believe in evolution, like myself, who freely admit that the "how" of the creation of life has not been full explained. The are good models and theories but nothing definitive exists. That said the idea that an abiogenesis scenario is mathematically impossible is also wrong. It assumes any number of things that aren't true:1. Biochemistry and chemistry aren't random die rolls, there are rules about how chemicals can form and bond lowering the odds dramatically. 2. You are trying to build life as wel know it, not really life as it might have been. Current theories on abiogenesis do not assume you build something 300 proteins long but more like 50. So what is being built isn't nearly as complex as the math assumes. You are actually ignoring steps that go from chemicals to polymers to self replicating polymers to protobiotics to bacteria. 3. You are not running sequential trials but simultaneous trials. In other words, nature isn't trying one combo and moving onto the next it is trying all of the combos at the same time.
The odds I've come across talk about 100 proteins, not 300. And to call those odds impossible is putting it nicely. Even if it were "only" 50, the odds would still be astronomically low, and still fit into the mathematically impossible realm. Less complex doesn't mean simple. Where do you think these "rules" come from concerning "how chemicals can form and bond"? You seem to be open to the idea that God set these rules, unless you meant something different entirely by your "how" comment. If so, you aren't who I was referring to with my initial post on this subject. About your "aliens in theory could work" comment, that reminds me of what Richard Dawkins said at the end of the Ben Stein documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Dawkins admitted there are signs of intelligent design, but in his opinion it would have come from a super race, an alien race. Funny, Dawkins has never seen an alien, Dawkins hasn't a clue if they exist or don't exist. Yet he's willing to accept the idea that they do? At least Christians have the Bible, and other evidence to base their faith on. What evidence does Dawkins have that aliens are even a possibility? It's just funny to watch how atheists deal with information that doesn't support their view of a world created entirely by chance.
Is there any video of God developing life? Because if there isn't then it couldn't have happened
Is there any video of God developing life? Because if there isn't then it couldn't have happened
Sadly, I believe you really think that's the same thing.
Is there any video of God developing life? Because if there isn't then it couldn't have happened
=====================================if this is sarcasm it is extremely witty...actually laughed out loud.About the origins being aliens...where did the aliens come from then. With the God scenario...God is the steady state...He always existed...nothing else did before Him. He is the beginning...and always existed.
No, evolution just doesn't claim to answer origins of life questions and nothing about the creation of life has any effect on evolution. It could be life evolved from collected matter binding in tidal pools or it could be pan-spermia or it could be a divine being created life in the most basic form. Doesn't matter evolution is about how life changes the origins of life are fundamentally not a concern of people who study evolution.
Right, but how many people do you know that believe in evolution AND intelligent design?
Well, I believe in evolution and intelligent design.
