Another thread about abiogenesis and evolution.

@sonhouse said
you are belaboring the obvious. People are spending their entire scientific research on this topic, THOUSANDS of computer scientists working on this issue and we are way past the point where AI makes huge blunders. Which doesn't mean AI is all knowing, they still can hallucinate but there is a LOT of work going on to reduce those effects.

No, my point is exactly that, AI has teams working on it, feeding it all the information they can; they also try to train it to learn on its own. So, under a rock somewhere, or in a pond, or wherever, an unguilded process learned to deal with the data/material world and used it as information to produce the most sophisticated code we have ever been exposed to. And we think it occurred by chance and necessity? We think this is the natural way of things?

@KellyJay said
No, my point is exactly that, AI has teams working on it, feeding it all the information they can; they also try to train it to learn on its own. So, under a rock somewhere, or in a pond, or wherever, an unguilded process learned to deal with the data/material world and used it as information to produce the most sophisticated code we have ever been exposed to. And we think it occurred by chance and necessity? We think this is the natural way of things?

Whatever, this is how things are and there is no going back.

@sonhouse said
Whatever, this is how things are and there is no going back.

What do think I am saying as you keep saying there is. I going back.

@KellyJay said
What do think I am saying as you keep saying there is. I going back.

You want to expand on that?

@sonhouse said
You want to expand on that?

I am asking you why you keep saying what your saying, you want me to expand on why you are saying what you are saying?

@KellyJay said
I am asking you why you keep saying what your saying, you want me to expand on why you are saying what you are saying?

Go ahead.

@KellyJay said
Does that answer the information coding in life? That is the thrust of the op.

"Information coding" in biological evolution is a scientifically meaningless phrase made up by creationists.

@AThousandYoung said
"Information coding" in biological evolution is a scientifically meaningless phrase made up by creationists.

No, but I am sure you believe that without being able to engage the topic.

@KellyJay said
No, but I am sure you believe that without being able to engage the topic.

I'm sorry that my biochemistry degree isn't good enough for you. Would you educate me? What scientific journal are you referencing? What are the mathematical models you are using to quantify "information"?

@AThousandYoung said
I'm sorry that my biochemistry degree isn't good enough for you. Would you educate me? What scientific journal are you referencing? What are the mathematical models you are using to quantify "information"?

Since the topic was information due to what is certain and uncertain your degree applies how? It was laid out in the beginning what I was talking about, this your way of not engaging by pointing some place else, to find the worthy to talk to you?

@KellyJay said
Since the topic was information due to what is certain and uncertain your degree applies how? It was laid out in the beginning what I was talking about, this your way of not engaging by pointing some place else, to find the worthy to talk to you?

In other words, God Did It, bottom line.

@sonhouse said
In other words, God Did It, bottom line.

If it cannot occur on its own, then something else did it.

@KellyJay said
If it cannot occur on its own, then something else did it.

Like I said. Your admission to that biases any attempt you make to put life origin science up as a failed discipline.

@sonhouse said
Like I said. Your admission to that biases any attempt you make to put life origin science up as a failed discipline.

All it would take to end this discussion is show how anything whatsoever could produce functionally complex instructional information without an agent being the catalyst. The discussion is about information due to an unguided process. Your denial without giving a reason only shows you don’t have a reason.

@KellyJay said
All it would take to end this discussion is show how anything whatsoever could produce functionally complex instructional information without an agent being the catalyst. The discussion is about information due to an unguided process. Your denial without giving a reason only shows you don’t have a reason.

Oh what a shocker, I am not a scientist so my opinions won't buy much. However, REAL scientists are making headway in life origins. You just cannot accept any new science pointing a way to figuring out life origins.