I’ll quote from 'Vital Question", emphasis is mine: I wonder at what point scientific thought/method began to eliminate one obvious possibility (intelligent design) of an hypothesis at the outset? I’m certain that you would agree that all possibilities should be on the table, even as we also both agree that an operating hypothesis could assert a “no God, only science” in order to at least give proof a chance. He of course does not see that, having already dismissed that possibility. Even Nick Lane admits to the marvelous nanoengineering of the “highest order” involved, and that many see that as God’s hand. Everyone should read at least his “The Vital Question”. When I see Nick Lane say that, that will give me pause for thought.
Nature got as far as RNA world but that ‘cannot adequately account for the emergence of an efficient RNA replicase or the translation system’. How does God explain that? Make that ‘simpler’? Explain anything? Nature has always existed, God or no.
It does not matter that in just 70 years we haven’t formulated what nature did over seven million times longer in labs the length of oceans. There is no gap in it, nothing at the beginning in the temperate iron - you know, the stuff at the heart of ATP synthase - bearing olivine alkaline thermal vents doing (electro-)chemistry. These fallacies are all part of apologetic: God’s existence can be rationally proposed therefore don’t try and explain complexity.ĪTP synthase evolution over a hundred million years is no gap. The impossibly complex formulation of proteins to transport e-'s, reduce compounds, and then phosphorylate ADP seem to be both evidence for the hand of God as well as drawing a circle around where the arrow hit. It connects the origin of life with the devastation of cancer, the first photosynthetic bacteria with our own mitochondria, sulphurous sludges with the emergence of consciousness, and the trivial differences between ourselves with the large-scale history of our planet.Another fine use of the sharpshooter fallacy. To understand this cycle is to fathom the deep coherence of the living world. At its core is an amazing cycle of reactions that uses energy to transform inorganic molecules into the building blocks of life - and the reverse. In Transformer, Nick Lane turns the standard view upside down, capturing an extraordinary scientific renaissance that is hiding in plain sight. A better question goes back to the formative years of biology: what processes animate cells and set them apart from lifeless matter? Yet there is no difference in information content between a living cell and one that died a moment ago. 'One of my favourite science writers' Bill Gatesįor decades, biology has been dominated by information - the power of genes.
0 kommentar(er)
