Led Zeppelin
Active Member
The other option is an accurate account of abiogenesis,
The other option is an accurate account of abiogenesis, rather than your deliberately lampooned strawman version.
That's neither a rebuttal nor a counterpoint. But in the interests of humouring you, with your strawman and false dichotomy...
Where is the falsehood in what I wrote? Do you not affirm that rocks exist? Do you not affirm that they collide in space? Do you not affirm space?
Where in your lampooned version is there a non verifiable component? This is where you fucked up. You provided a deliberately dishonest rendition of abiogenesis and it backfired, because even taking your deliberately bullshitted version at face value, it still fails in that every component mentioned can be verified to actually exist. Egg on face for thee.
No, I have not given you deliberate bullshit. No matter what name you give your theory of origins you must believe that Consciousness arises naturally, from the basic components available from whenever or however you think the universe first came into existence. Do you think life came before rocks?
Lets do you a favor and say the rocks could be made up of any mix of element you require. And lets say you have stars. I dont know if you believe rocks came before stars. Please tell us. Whatever it is you think happens next is what you must believe life arises naturally from. Not only life actually. But all the higher functions of life. Do you agree with this?
Last edited: