Article ~ Why the Miller–Urey Research Argues Against Abiogenesis

Why the Miller–Urey Research Argues Against Abiogenesis

https://answersingenesis.org/origin-of-l...iogenesis/

Resident physicalists, please feel free to argue why you believe this article is incorrect.

I posted this here because I wasn't entirely sure where else to place it. Feel free to move it to the more appropriate forum.

While not directly related to the arguments of consciousness and psi, it relates to arguments against physicalist Neo-Darwinian evolution.

[Laird]

I posted this here because I wasn't entirely sure where else to place it. Feel free to move it to the more appropriate forum.

I've moved it from SvP to Alternative Views on Science in keeping with the guidelines in that forum: How to navigate creating threads on science and scientific controversies on the forum.

I'll leave this to someone else.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jerry_Bergman

~~ Paul

[Laird]

I'll leave this to someone else.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jerry_Bergman

~~ Paul

But that didn't address a single point from the (lengthy) original article. I think that's literally true, but if not, it's very, very close to a literal truth. Not one point.

I'll leave this to someone else.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jerry_Bergman

~~ Paul

So, if you can't present a good argument against the article's message, simply attack the messenger? Is that it?

I’d say rationalwiki was even less reliable and balanced than actual wiki.

Nope, don't feel like reading the article and addressing all the points. Sometimes you gotta filter your reading by considering the source.

The RationalWiki article has references. I especially like this:

"(It should be added that, in a signed letter published in David Duke's National Association of White People newsletter, he stated that “reverse racial discrimination was clearly part of the decision,” so even according to himself it cannot have been solely because of his religious beliefs.[12])"

~~ Paul

Despite whatever links that Bergman may or may not have to racist groups, that doesn't detract from the OP article's points whatsoever.

Or maybe you just don't want to read the article.

Nope, don't feel like reading the article and addressing all the points. Sometimes you gotta filter your reading by considering the source.

The RationalWiki article has references. I especially like this:

"(It should be added that, in a signed letter published in David Duke's National Association of White People newsletter, he stated that “reverse racial discrimination was clearly part of the decision,” so even according to himself it cannot have been solely because of his religious beliefs.[12])"

~~ Paul

Besides, if any of his points are valid, surely an uncontroversial proponent of them could be referenced instead.

Linda