[...]
>>>Brian Harper: Oh, one last question. What contribution did ID researchers
make to the results you have presented?
DNAunion: Got me. It was not my point to show that ID has aided in these
findings. But an ID perspective, which I have an open mind to, can allow one
to come to different conclusions than those who dogmatically cling to a
purely-natural OOL here on Earth despite lack of solid evidence and despite
many contradcitory evidences.
Based on the scientific materials I have read, I claim that:
**********
Life as complex and organized as the "simplest" autonomous bacterium could
not have arisen by purely-natural means here on the prebiotic Earth in the
amount of time available under the conditions thought to have existed at that
time.
**********
The series of posts I made addresses the part dealing with time constraints,
and touches upon the conditions portion a bit.
If my claim is valid, it points away from the mainstream purely-naturalistic
scenario that has been put forth during most of the last century. And ONE
possible explanation that would fit my claim is that life that was designed
elsewhere arrived on Earth fully formed and ready to go (once it germinated
after arrival). In fact, I believe that many parts of this scenario fit the
observed facts BETTER than the mainstream view. That is an ID position.
My negative evidence against the mainstream abiogenesis scenarios (both the
few that I have posted and the many more I still have remaining in my
personal notes) is not positive evidence for ID: I understand that. But it
is indirect evidence for all scenarios that don't require bacterial life to
arise here on Earth from scratch in a few thousand to 10 million years during
periods of heavy impacts and in a non-highly-reduced atmosphere etc.. These
other scenarios include Panspermia, Directed Panspermia, Intelligent Design,
divine Creation, and others that might exist with which I am unfamiliar.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 22 2000 - 15:04:28 EST