Comments on: Woese: Life could have started “millions of times”

By: God's iPod - Uncommon Descent - Intelligent Design

God's iPod - Uncommon Descent - Intelligent Design — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 13:03:37 +0000

[...] common descent? Probably from origin-of-life researchers like Carl Woese. Over five years ago, I posted at UD a Chicago Tribune interview with Woese by Ronald Kotulak (8 Jan 2006): “Woese next went after a big stumbling block in classical evolution,” writes [...]

By: Biologos, Valiant Defender of Common Descent | Uncommon Descent

Biologos, Valiant Defender of Common Descent | Uncommon Descent — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:44:51 +0000

By: Jon Jackson

Jon Jackson — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:51:02 +0000

Fermi’s paradox still applies. Just were are the infinite number of other life forms in the universe which this theory would seem to predict?

By: Red Reader

Red Reader — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:15:12 +0000

Article:
THE COSMIC CONVERSATION
How can lifeless particles evolve into living things?
They basically talk themselves into it, a group of scientists say.
….
“In the beginning was the word and the particles were the words?”

OK. That’s a flippant observation.

But, what I liked about the article are the numerous actual observations and the possibilities they offer for testable predictions. Separating observable data from hypothesis leads me to conclude that the ACTUAL EVIDENCE will still be BEST explained as the result of an intelligent cause.

“Atoms, molecules and so on…communicate, process information and form new unions, acquiring capacities that are unpredictable and greater than the sum of their parts.”
DATA: Interactive properties exist.

“atoms…communicate to form molecules….genes communicate to orchestrate life processes.”
OBSERVABLE DATA: atoms interact. genes communicate.
ADJUNCT KNOWLEDGE: the parts of an automobile interact with each other and we know the automobile is a result of an intelligent cause.

“They are, essentially, trying to create life in a test tube.”
TESTABLE PREDICTION: Unless all or some part of a living organism is introduced into the experiment, the scientists will fail to “create” life in a test tube from only inanimate atoms.
CONCLUSIONS TO BE DRAWN FROM FAILURE TO “CREATE LIFE IN A TEST TUBE”:
1) That life does not come from non-life.
2) That the properties of atoms are “exploited” by “life” but the properties themselves are not life.
3) That “life” itself is not a “natural” phenomenon.
TELEOLOGICAL IMPLICATION: “Life” is a property of the intelligent cause, not the physical, material world.

By: DaveScot

DaveScot — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:11:06 +0000

Bill, I really like the way you tie articles together without explicitely exposing the tie. I see you do this often when a comment in a previous article suggests something. It’s subtle pedagogy and inspires thoughtfulness in the thoughful reader. How professorial! I wonder how many here will see where this article ties in? I’m sure JAD will find Woese’s “millions of times” worth consideration. JAD once quizzed me on how many times life started. To be safe I answered “at least once”.