Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!ethan
From: ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Origin of life
Message-ID: <1074@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 8-Mar-85 18:07:14 EST
Article-I.D.: utastro.1074
Posted: Fri Mar  8 18:07:14 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 11-Mar-85 05:41:08 EST
References: <14600002@hpfcrs.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 46

[]
  The question of how life originated has come up before in this newsgroup.
It is clear that
     1) There is no precise model of how life could have arisen on the
        primordial Earth without divine intervention.
     2) There is no reason to believe that the origin of life is an
        event which *requires* divine intervention.  That is, such an
        event would not require contravention of natural law.

That being the case, what can we conclude?  That we are ignorant.

One could, as a matter of religious faith, choose to believe that our ignorance
here is due to the fact that this event was a primordial miracle.  One could
not conclude this as a matter of science.

Now the history of science is replete with examples of how phenomena attributed
to the constant intervention of god(s) have come to be understood as the
natural consequence of the fundamental laws of the universe.  It is therefore
reasonable to suppose that the origin of life will similarly come to understood
as a natural phenomena.  From the point of view of the scientist, God has
so far remained an unnecessary hypothesis.  Thus the claim of creationists
to be advancing a scientific model seems devoid of merit.

****religious comments follow******

I do not understand the assertion that a belief in naturalistic interpretation
of events is necessarily atheistic.  Few people would claim that the action
of gravity is due to a constant divine intervention in the workings of the
universe.  Rather, it is generally understood that gravity is a natural law
and the religious among us see God as its author.  Why then is the natural
origin of life and its subsequent evolution seen as an atheistic hypothesis?
Certainly a deity capable of creating a universe is capable of ordaining
its laws so that life arises spontaneously throughout the universe.

It may be reasonable to claim that a literal reading of the Bible certainly
casts doubt on evolution.  However, as others have pointed out, it also
seems to imply a flat Earth and a geocentric universe.  Are the creationists
on the net really prepared to argue in favor these ideas? 

********************************************


"Don't argue with a fool.      Ethan Vishniac
 Borrow his money."            {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan

*Anyone who wants to claim these opinions is welcome to them.*