Orgin of Life
What is the orgin of life? Was it the product of intelligent design, or does it just have the appearance of design? Did life originate from random things combining into proteins and amino acids and eventually into the meaningful information that we call DNA? What are the odds?
|
5
points
Intelligent design is empirically unfalsifiable. It propositions a entity outside of nature, how then could we use nature(the only tool we can use) to verify its existence? Some might argue that logically there must be a creator because the chances for life to come from non-life are low, however by that same logic all winners of a lottery cheated or had someone cheat so that they would win because the chances of winning were low. Their implied premise is that to accomplish something of low chance requires an intelligent agent. That leaves abiogenesis. interesting thing to ponder: I've heard arguments that there wasn't enough time for abiogensis to occur on earth, meaning life is of a extra-terrestrial origin. Also, they have found an amino acid on a comet :) and the earth was bombarded with comments early on. yes, that is a theory known as panspermia. Unfortunately, neither intelligent design nor panspermia truly adress the origins of life: intelligent design begs the question of who made the creator, and panspermia simply shifts the origin of life to another planet. Personally, I am leaning towards iron sulfur world theory Side: Iron Sulfur World Theory
First off, I know it's an innocent typo, but I found it funny. Your last sentance: "...the earth was bombarded with comments early on." It made me smile. Anyway, lottery has a much higher chance than life. If the pot is incredibly large, say $50 billion (larger than most lotteries, I'd assume), then the chances of winning with a single ticket are 1 in 50 billion, right (assuming $1 tickets). Calculated out, the odds of 172 random amino acids being only left-handed (and thus, life-friendly) are 1 in 6 thousand billion billion billion billion, or 6 times 10^52, not to mention whether those amino acids would form a viable protein (the average protein length is around 200). The chance of only left-handed acids is less than the chance of randomly choosing a single atom in the Earth. Add into that the odds of finding a viable protein, and the odds are astronomical (somewhere around 1 in 10^77--It would be easier to find a marked atom in five million Milky Way Galaxies). Once again, winning a massive, $50 billion lottery is only 1 in 10^12. Chances of choosing only left-handed acids: 1 in 10^52. Chances of making 150 acids into a viable protien (assuming there are only left-handed acids): 1 in 10^77. That would be like winning the $50 billion lottery six times in a row. If somebody did that, they'd have to have cheated! Side: The math doesn't check out
Your calculations assume that biochemistry operates on chance, like a lottery. It doesn't. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/ http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/ Also, what is a level of improbability that would still be acceptable to you? Where is the numerical threshold between acceptable and unacceptable improbability? Side: The math doesn't check out
Once again, winning a massive, $50 billion lottery is only 1 in 10^12. Chances of choosing only left-handed acids: 1 in 10^52. Chances of making 150 acids into a viable protien (assuming there are only left-handed acids): 1 in 10^77. That would be like winning the $50 billion lottery six times in a row. If somebody did that, they'd have to have cheated! They did cheat, using Natural Selection. In other words we are not dealing with a static set of optimum amino acids and their combination, and a pool of permutations attempting to reach it. Instead we have a system that rewards self-replication with greater prominence, thus creating a positive feedback loop which accelerates the formation of complexity. Side: The math doesn't check out
I personally support the Bubble Theory and Primordial Soup Theory. You know how if you put a pair of head phones in your pocket how when you pull it out it is such an intricate knot that you yourself could not create a more complex knot? That's how I view the "design" of the universe. Random occurences coupled with scientific law and logic can create some pretty big 'knots'. Considering how big the universe is, it'd be highly improbable for there not to be life. And then there's also the recent discovery that there have been multiple Big Bangs. That increases the odds astronomically. A never ending series of Big Bangs that could extend to infinity. Side: Iron Sulfur World Theory
1
point
|
