Posted by OneGlove [OneGlove] on November 18, 1999 at 19:23:55 {KEdmzBXaT6ddh6ih/xtgVOGhhkwG5g}:
In Reply to: *******Carl Sagan posted by DaJahVeu on November 18, 1999 at 18:49:29:
Perhaps I did not make myself clear.
My parents were alive.
Their parents were alive.
ad naseum.
We get back to the first cell. It was alive.
FOSSIL RECORD ENDS THE REST IS HYPOTHESIS:
Preceeding the first cell were creatures a lot like cells but without many of the important stuctures, perhaps they were like free floating strands of DNA.
Before those were the very first replicators.
Before those replicators were complex molecules that did not replicate themselves. They were not alive.
Before those complex molecules were amino acids.
Before these amino acids was water and a primitive atmosphere.
Please note why the fossil record ends where it does. Things smaller than cells do not get fossilized. But there are incrediably solid chemical reasons for making the hypothesis we do. It is still a very good hypothesis, and if you have questions about the details do some studying.
Or stop asking questions, and say God did it.
But remember before Newton, people thought angels pushed the planets. He wasn't content with 'God did it'. Before Germ theory people thought God caused diseases. Doctors weren't content with 'God did it'. Before Darwin, people thought God created each organism individualy. He wasn't content with 'God did it'. Now, why should you be content with 'God did it' for the first prokaryotic life forms?
As for panspermia, the scientist who proposed that also believes that influenza comes from outer space. You've been lied to if you have been told that is real research.
Look at some of the latest things going on in bio-chemistry if you want to see real science. This is a truly exciting time to be alive.
:Their main reason for this "THEORY" is resultant of lack of fossil evidence to support any darwinin theory. I guess they are giving up on Charlie.
You have been lied to. You are arguing from ignorance. The fossil evidence is more than copius. The fossil record proves evolution beyond a shadow of a doubt. You obviously did not go to the library like I asked and look up a book on horse evolution.
Very well. If you are sure that there are no transitional fossils in the fossil record, then read through these two articles:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
If I am wrong, you will learn nothing. No transitional fossils exist. But I have seen transitional fossils and if I am right, it will open up a whole new world for you.
The two articles are part of a great site that you should visit when you get a chance. I have provided the link to the main page of the site below. Visit it after you have read the two articles.
--OneGlove