7/13/2004: Baited bull

[spudcon]

The point is that Darwinists claim that they are right and Creationists are wrong because Darwinists are using scientific method. They aren't. Show me a duplicatable experiment that can prove life sprung from primordial goo. The question then becomes which "magic" you have as your religion.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by spudcon

The point is that Darwinists claim that they are right and Creationists are wrong because Darwinists are using scientific method. They aren't. Show me a duplicatable experiment that can prove life sprung from primordial goo.

Abiogenesis is a separate proposition from evolution. Evolution has been confirmed repeatedly using the scientific method.

As for abiogenesis, many of the requisite steps have been confirmed using the scientific method (see UT's post). There are steps we haven't confirmed, and there may be steps we will never know. And, even if we do demonstrate a possible path for abiogenesis, we very probably will never know exactly what path actually did happen on Earth. But this is a big part of where the scientific method differs from religion:

The question then becomes which "magic" you have as your religion.

No, part of science is to not assume that "I don't know yet" means "it was magic".

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Abiogenesis is a separate proposition from evolution. Evolution has been confirmed repeatedly using the scientific method.

As for abiogenesis, many of the requisite steps have been confirmed using the scientific method (see UT's post). There are steps we haven't confirmed, and there may be steps we will never know. And, even if we do demonstrate a possible path for abiogenesis, we very probably will never know exactly what path actually did happen on Earth. But this is a big part of where the scientific method differs from religion:
No, part of science is to not assume that "I don't know yet" means "it was magic".

I don't know how clouds form in the sky...it was magic!