[geocentrism] Re: dino a mammal kangaroo???

  • From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:02:15 +0100

Dear Philip,
This is copied from the link you offered below and is part of '15 answers to 
creationist nonsense.'
Could anything be more 'arm waving' than this answer? Is this the best they can 
offer to explain the origin of life? They would have appeared to have moved the 
goalposts from Earth into space now! How very convenient! I suppose that's why 
they are talking about Mars so much.  

The words highlighted in RED are for Paul's benefit.

7. Evolution cannot explain how life first appeared on earth. 

The origin of life remains very much a mystery, but biochemists have learned 
about how primitive nucleic acids, amino acids and other building blocks of 
life could have formed and organized themselves into self-replicating, 
self-sustaining units, laying the foundation for cellular biochemistry. 
Astrochemical analyses hint that quantities of these compounds might have 
originated in space and fallen to earth in comets, a scenario that may solve 
the problem of how those constituents arose under the conditions that prevailed 
when our planet was young. 

Creationists sometimes try to invalidate all of evolution by pointing to 
science's current inability to explain the origin of life. But even if life on 
earth turned out to have a nonevolutionary origin (for instance, if aliens 
introduced the first cells billions of years ago), evolution since then would 
be robustly confirmed by countless microevolutionary and macroevolutionary 
studies. 

Finally:

Could they be referring to the discredited Miller-Urey experiment about amino 
acids etc? after all its still shown in text books.

What macroevolutionary studies could they possibly have made????



Jack



Other related posts: