How’s that? You talking Russian roulette?
The scene where he holds up the bullet and says “This is this; it ain’t anything else; this is this”
I don’t know why but this is one of my top most memorable movie moments of all time. Up there with blade runners tears in rain
I forgot that line. Who says it, Walken?
I forgot that line. Who says it, Walken?
Its Robert de Niro
That makes more sense. He was so amazing in that movie. Maybe his best.
That’s false. There is no “atheistic” view on the question
What is your view as to how life began?
I really don’t know. No one does, as far as I can tell. To me, it’s a question of chemistry and doesn’t seem so impossible to imagine. It’s absolutely trivial next to a question like “where did matter come from” or “how could a god that could create life exist”. Now those are really really unanswerable questions.
I really don’t know.
To the extent that atheists have a theory of the origin of life it’s the lightning striking water theory.
What’s your theory then?
What’s your theory then?
God created life.
And you think that is easier to imagine than lightning striking water?
And you think that is easier to imagine than lightning striking water?
No. The point I was trying to make is that imagining that life was created by lightning striking water is no easier than imagining that God created life.
Well, I know lightning and water exist at least. We know there are all kinds of possible chemical reactions. There was an incredible amount of time for things to happen, and a seed could have even come from another planet. Etc. But, in as much as the answer is unknown, I agree with you. I won’t be saying you shouldn’t believe it because I have some kind of concrete proof.
until one day a proto-Homer with a vestigial tail climbs out of the pond and begins making his way around on land.
That would be you not understanding evolution
a random pond is blasted with direct lightning strikes over millennia
That would be you not understanding abiogenesis. For a start, try about 500 million years ago- or are you a YEC, in which case you believe that Humankind was formed from dirt a couple of thousand ears ago?
Try reading something more up to date than than the Miller-Urey experiment of 1952.
As tempogain pointed out, neither evolution or abiogenesis has anything to do with atheism.
The point I was trying to make is that imagining that life was created by lightning striking water is no easier than imagining that God created life.
Which is why nobody thinks that nowadays.
BTW, how did God create life?
No. The point I was trying to make is that imagining that life was created by lightning striking water is no easier than imagining that God created life.
Why does ‘God’ and ‘Lightning Striking Water’ have to be mutually exclusive though? I mean God presumably used a method to create life, couldn’t that method be lightning striking water?
BTW, how did God create life?
I don’t know. I don’t even know how my own life was created. All I know is one day I was just ‘here.’
When a mommy and daddy love each other very much…,
Seriously, there has been a lot of good work in abiogenesis lately.
When a mommy and daddy love each other very much…,
Seriously, there has been a lot of good work in abiogenesis lately.
What do you consider the most plausible theory of the creation of life?
I like the the idea of it originating in undersea thermal vents. Provides energy, plenty of places for the precursor complex chemicals necessary to form, anaerobic environment, place for chemicals deposits to accumulate without being dispersed into open waters…
But I’m not a biochemist, so I’m probably wrong. Based on the track record of methodological naturalism so far, I’m pretty comfortable we’ll eventually get an answer from the people who spend their lives studying such things.