There have been some recent claims by evolutionists about abiogenesis that seem to have arisen only over the last 5 or 10 years. I think it’s a subject that should be explored in a structured way in this forum. I have propositions for two formal debates here, I’ll argue the affirmative on the first, and the negative on the second. They can be either/or, or I’ll do them both simultaneously, or one after the other.
The term “abiogenesis” has been around for hundreds of years, its concept has been around for thousands, all the way back to Aristotle. It is a term that refers to
natural processes, a spontaneous generation of life from non-life by random, unguided processes. It is a conflictive view to any kind of purposive, supernatural creation. Yet we see this at talkorigins;
Quote:
|
Abiogenesis is a fact. Regardless of how you imagine it happened (note that creation is a theory of abiogenesis), it is a fact that there once was no life on earth and that now there is. Thus, even if evolution needs abiogenesis, it has it.
|
CB090: Evolution without abiogenesis
I don't think that anyone disagrees that there once was no life on earth and now there is. I know of no worldview that disputes that. But in my view, the rest of that paragraph is completely false. So I’ll take the affirmative on this one;
Resolved; Supernatural creation is in no way related to abiogenesis. One has to be true and the other has to be false.
I’ll take suggestions on an improvement/rewording for this resolution. My point is that creation does not harmonize with abiogenesis, it
conflicts with abiogenesis. Abiogenesis in not just ANY origin of life as talkorigins asserts, it is only about a NATURAL origin of life. Evolution does not automatically have it. Creation is NOT a theory of abiogenesis.
Another recent assertion, that seems to be more widely claimed than the above, is that evolution and abiogenesis are not related. It’s been worded like this;
Abiogenesis is not evolution, and evolution is not abiogenesis. The two concepts are unrelated.
I’ll do the negative on the claim that the two concepts are unrelated.
For either/both, I’m thinking of our usual 5/4 post structure, with something in the neighborhood of a 72 hour time limit between posts. As always, I’ll be co-operative in working out these details. As a refreshing change from the past, I would like to see some pretty tight word limits this time, to make them easy to read, and bring out some skills in concise word processing.