[CS-FSLUG] Intelligent design...

[Chris Brault]

Here's my take,

>>
>> Here is the problem with that statement: "try to create life". The  
>> moment a scientist creates life, all they do is prove us  
>> creationists correct. There really is no possible way to prove  
>> evolution.
>
>
>     Well, I don't think I'd agree with that. I don't think it is  
> possible for abiogenesis to occur by random, but I think it is  
> possible that (if the theory is correct) you could prove it possible.  
> Theoretically, if you put the right concentrations of stuff in the  
> fake "atmosphere" and primordial soup, then ionize it with a fake  
> electrical storm, you are suppose to get life.
>
>     If that worked, they could prove it. The problem is that in the  
> present attempts, they did get life (as I recall), but it appears to  
> have been bacteria that contaminated the experiment, not actually  
> something created.

The original experiment, by Miller and Ullrey (the double-l twins), used 
an atmosphere based on the gas giants (Jupiter, Saturn) and totaly 
guessed at the composition of the "primordial soup". The experiment 
failed miserably. As a result, the atmosphere had to be altered ... just 
a bit. Each time there was a change, the experiment came closer to 
working. By the time the experiment actually produced amino acids it in 
no way resembled anything that could have existed, even mythically, on 
the earth "billions of years ago".

They, in fact, had created the world's first amino acid generator. It 
wasn't the best generator though. It required a cold trap to filter the 
mix, otherwise the aminoacids created would be destroyed a few seconds 
later. Yup ... it failed in every way.

Later (1960's), another scientist attempted to use another model and 
perform the same experiment. Another collosal failure. More experiments 
and more failures followed. The only thing discovered was that noone can 
think of how it could have possibly happened.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> The bigger problem, though, is that the chances of  such conditions 
> occurring in the wild is even less likely. :-) But,  the thing is, 
> Genesis tells us God made Adam from earth, so essentially that's not 
> really different from what scientists claim possible, other than that 
> they refuse to admit an intelligent force behind it.
>
>     And, then comes Nathan's point: they have to point out how it  
> wasn't done intelligently... which, if they thought that, would be true.

Adam was "designed" from the "dust" by God himself. After all, Adam 
means "from the red dirt". Man does not come from the dirt. Man comes 
from God. Our bodies may be dust but we are not.

Gabe