RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Intelligent Design and Panspermia, Timothy Birdnow gets confused< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Jason Spaceman



Posts: 163
Joined: Nov. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2006,16:14   

Quote
But that is neither here nor there; the point of this essay is to illustrate the connection between ID and Panspermia. Darwinian defenders (like the Panda`s Rectum crowd) turn purple whenever the topic of Intelligent Design is raised, and immediately try to shout down the opposition, yet they have been strangely silent about a corollary proposition-one advocated by such men as Francis Crick and Fred Hoyle. Panspermia is the theory that life on Earth came from elsewhere. It either drifted here by accident via comets or somesuch or it was intentionally engineered. (The latter was advocated by Francis Crick, who realized that life on Earth could not have evolved in the fashion Darwin believed.) Directed Panspermia argues that some alien intelligence seeded the Earth (and probably other places) with specially tailored genetic packages to produce a biological explosion. This fits with what we know about the development of life on Earth; there seems to have been a sudden explosion of life during the Pre-Cambrian (which is at odds with the view of Natural Selection, which says life should have been steadily evolving.) The Pan-Spermers (to coin a phrase) would argue that this point in time is when the seed-ship arrived. As Robert Zubrin has pointed out in his book The Case for Mars, astronauts have actually carried bacteria to the Moon and back-and the bacteria was fine! Evolution argues that developing new characteristics requires mutations while organisms retain old characteristics in their genetic makeup, and these Earthly organisms seem well adapted to space travel. Suggestive, no?


Read it here.

   
plasmasnake23



Posts: 42
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2006,09:25   

I always wonder where these guys think these aliens that genetically engineered bacteria to become metazoa came from. Did they evolve?

However I think my new rubric for deciding whether to even listen to what some anti-evolutionist has to say will be whether they claim natural selection is a tautology. That shit is so tired.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4565
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2006,12:40   

Re "listen to what some anti-evolutionist has to say will be whether they claim natural selection is a tautology."

Funny thing about that "argument" is that "tautology" means "always true regardless of evidence" - and somehow I thought they wanted it to be false. Oh well.

Henry

  
plasmasnake23



Posts: 42
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2006,14:14   

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 13 2006,17:40)
Re "listen to what some anti-evolutionist has to say will be whether they claim natural selection is a tautology."

Funny thing about that "argument" is that "tautology" means "always true regardless of evidence" - and somehow I thought they wanted it to be false. Oh well.

Henry

Haha yes it does make you wonder.

  
  3 replies since Aug. 12 2006,16:14 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]