Strange as it may seem, the environmentalists do have
a compelling answer to this profound issue. Check the
end of this post...........ahahahaha.......ahahahanson
"charliew2" <charliew2@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:10n0i9rsrdr11e0@corp.supernews.com...
Thomas Palm <Thomas.Palm@chello.removethis.se> wrote in
news:Xns9583DDB972E01ThomasPalmchellose@212.83.64.229...
"Bill Corden" <Corden@somwhere.com> wrote in
news:ICRbd.529$Ob.263@fe61.usenetserver.com:
"Donald L Ferrt" <wolfbat359@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:b9eb3efe.0410101711.4d986432@posting.google.com...
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/evolution.html?tw=wn_tophead_
8 ID [Intelligent design] proponents quote Darwin, cite the
Scopes monkey trial, talk of "scientific objectivity," then in
the same breath declare that extraterrestrials might have
designed life on Earth.
[Cordon]
The author seems to say this "extraterrestrial" part to support the
notion that IDers are wacked out or something. Well Francis Crick,
who died recently, was a life long athiest. He was a very big thinker
and clearly his work was even more important than Darwin's. This is
what he said: ----
Could life have first started much earlier on the planet of some
distant star, perhaps eight to 10 billion years ago? If so, a higher
civilization, similar to ours, might have developed from it at about
the time that the Earth was formed. Would they have had the urge &
the technology to spread life through the wastes of space and seed
these sterile planets, including our own?..
[Palm]
This is not intelligent design! ID claims that life is far too improbable
to have evolved on its own.
[Charlie]
Other branches of science imply the same thing. If I am to believe the 2nd
law of thermodynamics, saying that things tend to always get more randomized
with time, it is difficult to see how molecules can spontaneously order
themselves enough to create something that can reproduce itself. I realize
that in today's world, living things create order at the expense of
introducing more disorder in the things around them. However, before any
living thing exists, it is difficult to envision some collection of
molecules that can overcome the 2nd law.
[Palm]
Crick's hypothesis still assumes life
originally had to occur naturally, he just considers the possibility that
it might not have done so on Earth. It's just a variation of the
panspermia theory which has been around for a very long time.
[Charlie]
Crick ducked the main issue. Life had to start somewhere in the universe,
so the core argument that he was commenting on should be directed to the
place and time where this took place.
[hanson]
There are very many ways to answer the "life-origin" issue but
all of them are philosophical and untestable. Yet in the profound
confines of "environment" you'll find, for this issue like for all other
problems, always perfect and self-serving answers. These solutions
are anchored as the foundations in the commandments of the green
bible which insists, that
= "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
= believe is true ... -- Paul Watson, Greenpeace, and ......
= "A lot of environmental [scientific] messages are simply not
= accurate. We use hype." -- Jerry Franklin, Ecologist, UoW, and...
= "We make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
= mention of any doubts we may have [about] being honest."
= -- Stephen Schneider (Stanford prof. who first sought fame as
= a global cooler, but has now hit the big time as a global warmer.
So, can all you little green idiots (Charlie and a few others are
exempt) now fathom the deeper meaning and implications of
environmentalism?
One thing we knew long before the current, virulent & pathological
form of "environmentalism" existed was that a vast portion of
life appeared to be green. Furthermore, since we have seen from
the paucity of answers in thread "Six easy pieces of enviro green",
that there is no ken and that there is no acumen for neither math
nor physics, in enviro NGs, I will not waste my time to show how
far one can go with these disciplines to gain, approximate or
estimate the solution to the knowledge of the origin of life.
But it's easy and crystal clear!
By grace, for environmentalists the solution is easy (see above).
But even luckier, to any human and all animals (except to enviros)
there are certain self-evident truths available that show and reflect
VERY clearly life's origin, with the most important realization being
that Religion and Philosophy are useless aberrations in the search
for the begin', the purpose and the destination of existence............
AHAHAHAHA........AHAHAHAHA...ahahaha......ahahahanson
.
