Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!nntp.terraraq.uk!news1.firedrake.org!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Life: Turn it upside down!
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:37:37 -0400
Organization: Eek
Lines: 78
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <uv45e1$dit8$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uv3bk0$79c9$1@dont-email.me> <uv3dk7$7pdd$1@dont-email.me>
 <uv3sco$bgum$1@dont-email.me> <uv40ng$ciks$1@dont-email.me>
 <uv41nl$cmhr$1@dont-email.me> <uv42pm$d3fb$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: jtem01@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="86386"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+lnrXPpUATlDROprVUsBlhGLLBI=
In-Reply-To: <uv42pm$d3fb$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4355

  Arkalen wrote:

>  JTEM wrote:

>> It's Faith-Based.

> No, it's based on general knowledge of chemistry and the data we have on 
> early Earth conditions.

That is literally Faith-Based!  Because you have no idea what
is required to spontaneously form life, or even if it were
ever possible. Abiogenesis is not the only game in town, not
even the only scientific game.

So it's based on beliefs. Plural.

>> If you study non life you study things that actually exist.

> That can be true or false whether you study life or nonlife.

Working out abiogenesis is studying things that do not exist,
including the theorized environment... not to mention HOW
this environment could manage it.

Study non life is actually studying things that exist.

> In this 
> case while we no longer have an oxygen-less ocean we can simulate such 
> conditions when doing experiments; those experiments involve things that 
> actually exist.

If those experiments ever succeeded, which they haven't, that
would prove that Creationism is real. After all, it would be
an example of an intelligence bringing into existence life by
intent, by design. But it wouldn't and couldn't "Prove" that
it ever happened in nature.

> I don't know if any such spectrum is explicitly published

Well there's your problem!

> to my 
> knowledge its contents are basically what you listed in your OP.

Oh, dude; I was woafully under performing there!  We're talking
a HUGE spectrum, from the most basic forms of matter to the
most complex examples of non-living structures... onto the very
simplest forms of life...

Think of it like the "Electromagnetic Spectrum." We're talking
BIG here, very BIG -- the opposite of small.

> So not 
> exactly warranting a paper

Lol!  It's exactly what papers need to be written about!

THAT IS THE POINT!

It's an approach that needs to take over, be completed in order
to make any legitimate discoveries.

> but maybe there are review papers or 
> subject-matter papers with good introductions that address your idea. 
> I'll keep you posted if I look it up.

Science is gone anyways. It's all driven by money:  Grants.

If it doesn't have a direct military or financial benefit, it's
politics now.

So don't hold your breath.



-- 
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5