Freeman Dyson, theoretical physicist, mathematician, and member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences states: Concerning the origin of life itself, the watershed between chemistry and biology, the transition between lifeless chemical activity and organized biological metabolism, there is no direct evidence at all. The crucial transition from disorder to order left behind no observable traces.2 One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet we are here—as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation.1 —George Wald, Nobel Laureate
Ancient Chinese proverb says "Wise man requires evidence precede belief to better avoid pigs in pokes."
yes, the concept of evidence came soon after the thickening of pre-frontal cortex i would imagine. Not thick enough for many
June 27, 2012 An Interview With Freeman Dyson on the Origins of Life on Earth by Suzan Mazur “Then after that came us — stage six. That’s the end of the Darwinian era, when cultural evolution replaces biological evolution as the main driving force. “Cultural” means that the big changes in living conditions are driven by humans spreading their technology and their ways of making a living, by learning from one another rather than breeding.” — Freeman Dyson, Eastover Farm "Several weeks ago the Lonsdale prize went to researchers who think first life was RNA, a replicating creature. So I rang up Freeman Dyson, emeritus professor at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, to see if he still embraces the idea that original life was a “garbage bag world,” a membranous creature with dirty water trapped inside that reproduced for a billion years or more with high rates of error before replicating. "Dyson does the math on this in his book, Origins of Life(2nd. ed.), based on Alexander Oparin’s cell-first theory of metabolism. Dyson calls it his “toy boat model,” calculated with pencil and paper, where thousands of molecular units make the leap from disorder to order with “reasonable probability.” "During our phone conversation, Dyson told me that he does indeed still hold to his hypothesis and also still thinks RNA was a byproduct of that first creature’s own metabolism, emerging as a parasite and eventual symbiotic partner. He says it doesn’t make sense that original life copied itself without getting its act together first. "In his Origins book, Dyson also refers to Doron Lancet’s work on defining metabolism, also based on Oparin’s model, by computer simulations of origin of life, saying: “Doron Lancet has tackled this problem by studying computer models of the evolution of molecular populations, which he calls replicative-homeostatic early assemblies (RHEA). In these models, metabolism is defined in a general way as the evolution of a population in which some of the molecules catalyze the synthesis of others. He finds conditions under which populations can evolve to a high and self-sustaining level of catalytic organization.” "This prompted me to call Doron Lancet, a professor at Weizmann Institute, to see what his current thinking is. I reached Lancet at a conference in Stockholm. He had this to say about Freeman Dyson: “He was my first inspiration. A chapter in his book, Infinite in All Directions, made me realize in the early 1990s that DNA/RNA was not necessarily the holy grail, and that there was an alternative in the form of molecular assemblies composed of mutually interacting simple molecules. The “Lipid World” model as a viable alternative to the “RNA World” would not have come to be without him.” "Dyson envisions seven stages of life: " More >>
Is it possible/good some believers would care more about God, however care little about human rights and natural environment? Any evidence-based opinions?
thanks for the link... I really enjoy seeing how that guy thinks. I note this... Suzan Mazur: Has your thinking about origin of life changed significantly since the second edition of your book Origins of Life 13 years ago? And do you still say everyone is equally ignorant about origin of life? Freeman Dyson: Yes, I would still say that. We’ve learned a certain amount since then but the basic mystery remains. We don’t have a clearly defined chemical path from a mixture of garbage to an organized cell. That’s what we somehow have to discover. The main difference between my thinking about things then and now is that now we firmly understand that there was an RNA world. The evidence for the preponderance of RNA at some stage has become stronger. And, of course, we know about various kinds of RNA operating in living cells today.
almost every Christian preacher I have ever come across speaks of being a good shepard of God's creation and preserving it for future generations. I know just about every Catholic priest I have ever heard preach... and I have been a weekly mass goer for 90 percent of my life, preaches about human dignity, human life and helping the poor at least a few times a year or more. A few times a year the churches have visiting missionaries in, to work on giving. They have devoted their lives to serous causes and their stories are frequently amazing. But, within weeks we forget. We starting thinking about paying for kids schools and get caught up in day to day concerns like everyone else. So of us are not good to begin with. As I think both Carson and Rubio have said in the last few days, I think it is fair for others to judge Christians and non Christians by their works. I find Carson to be an extremely well integrated guy. Perhaps he is one of the few examples of a public Christian who comes reasonable close to the mark in his public life. (I have no idea about his private life.) But, I note I can't think of too many other public people who are in his league at all. That so many people fall short of the mark whether Christian or otherwise manifests our need for the help of the Holy Spirit or whatever you think could help us. Just being aware of that need really humbles/ humiliates me again. Thanks for the post.
Q https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_Fire Eric Liddell (Ian Charleson), born in China of Scottish missionary parents, is in Scotland. His devout sister Jennie (Cheryl Campbell) disapproves of Liddell's plans to pursue competitive running. But Liddell sees running as a way of glorifying God before returning to China to work as a missionary. ... ... When Eric Liddell accidentally misses a church prayer meeting because of his running, his sister Jennie upbraids him and accuses him of no longer caring about God. Eric tells her that though he intends to eventually return to the China mission, he feels divinely inspired when running, and that not to run would be to dishonour God, saying, "I believe that God made me for a purpose. But He also made me fast, and when I run, I feel His pleasure." UQ Liddell and Abrahams Personally, I think, sometimes it's possible that a person could do better with a divinely inspired gift/talent to provide extra something beyond and better than merely with a self inspired gift/talent. Especially for the matters such as social justice, missionary/foreign aid service, compassionate charity, etc. Just 2 cents!