FloydLee
Posts: 577
Joined: Sep. 2009
|
Okay, let's check back with SLP. I asked him a question previously. I want an answer.
In 2002, William Schopf published a fascinating book, Life's Origins: The Beginnings of Biological Evolution.
(Yes, that's the full title. Not exactly separating abiogenesis from evolution, is it?)
The most fascinating part of the book is what the late evolutionist Dr. John Oro wrote in one of the chapters.
| Quote | In the mid-1800s, Darwin showed how the concept of evolution by natural selection applies to living systems. But evolution also operates in the inanimate world, not only Earth but the universe as a whole, including all cosmic bodies (galaxies, stars, circumstellar and interstellar clouds, interstellar molecules, planetary systems, planets, comets, asteroids, meteorites) and all chemical elements.
Comets transported organic molecules and water to the primitive Earth early in the planet's history, presumably over a period of several hundred million years. In the oceans that then formed, both cometary and terrestrial (those synthesized directly in the environment),
organic molecules evolved by natural selection,
ultimately giving rise to life - possibly in the "warm little pond" that Darwin envisioned in his famous letter to Joseph Hooker (see chapter 3). The linkage from cosmic elements to cometary molecules to primitive Earth to biological evolution ties cosmochemical evolution to the origin of life. |
Here's the key phrase in the middle of that quotation:
| Quote | organic molecules evolved by natural selection,
ultimately giving rise to life - possibly in the "warm little pond" that Darwin envisioned in his famous letter to Joseph Hooker |
Not only does this statement tie abiogenesis to evolution, but notice that Oro even tosses in a direct, unmistakable factor: "organic molecules evolved by natural selection." IOW, the exact driving force cited for postbiotic evolution is the same cited for prebiotic evolution.
Oro also pointed out something else:
| Quote | "We can conclude that the different forms of life are not the result of a process having a determined finality developed a priori by a creative plan, nor are they the result of a chance fortuitous act. Life emerged as the result of natural evolutionary processes, as a new form of movement of matter during its process of development."
---from AI Oparin's final scientific paper (1986), quoted by Oro in Schopf 2002. |
If that paragraph sounds familiar, it's because it echoes something De Duve recently said in 2009 (Nmgirl quoted it and SLP re-quoted it.)
| Quote | Nobel laureate Christian de Duve summarized the plenary session: "The participants unanimously accepted as indisputable the affirmation that the Universe, as well as life within it, are the products of long evolutionary histories...."
---Nmgirl's post, Oct 6th, 11:58, "International General 2009 (Conference)" |
Remember, you evolutionists say that abiogenesis is separate from evolution. And you say it often. However, your statement, as you can see, is NOT true. That's what all this is about.
In fact, let's toss in one more statement, this one comes from Paul Lurquin's 2003 book concerning the orign of life.
| Quote | "The RNA World Hypothesis is a very attractive one, because it bases the appearance of life squarely within the realm of evolution."
Lurquin, The Origins of Life and the Universe, p. 32. |
******
Okay, that's like background information for the upcoming post or posts.
SLP thinks I "deceived readers" on the short version of Oro that I've quoted in other forums and past years (and wants to apparently debate it here and now), and meanwhile my own question for SLP is designed to show that I've never quotemined John Oro AND to show that Oro meant precisely what he said---and in doing so puts the lie to the evolutionist claim that prebiotic evolution (abiogenesis) is separate from evolution.
No deceit, no joke: Abiogenesis is part and parcel of evolution, no doubt.
Continued in next post or posts.
FloydLee
|
