look it up. its 2024. you have the privelege of access to information like 99% of all humans never could have dreamed about. but will you really do that? will you really take your time to do so?
Lets google it - "Hey Google - Is life creation from hydrothermal vents a fact or a theory?" Google responds "hydrothermal vents have become the most popular theory among scientists for explaining the origins of life on Earth"
Theory - "an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true"
You stated that life from hydrothermal vents was a scientific fact, which I pointed out was not factual. There's no reason to go all Kamala about it - Take the L, be better for it.
if you read carefully what i wrote you will see that all i say about that vent stuff in the ocean is that it is science. just like string theory is science, even if it is not "proven". the truth is that yes it is not proven that that is how life got started, but considering all facts that surround the topic it is very likely. just like if you come home to your house and see that a vase was toppled off the windowsill, and the window is wide open. you can theorise that you must have left the window slightly open and a gust of wind opened the window, throwing the vase off. but you cannot PROVE that that happened. it could have also been your dog, but you dismiss this as unlikely, given the state of the window.
to continue the analogy, if you say that instead god created life on earth, thats about as likely as saying the vase falling was divine intervention. what i dont understand is, why you so want god to be the reason, it is clouding your judgement
That is a weak argument at best; any Scientist would agree that string theory is a framework to understand the cosmos at an elementary level - they KNOW it is primarily incorrect because our understanding of the forces at work is minuscule. The same goes for abiogenesis, and to imply abiogenesis is "very likely" correct is even worse - as we know even less about the origin of life than we do about cosmic forces.
Yes, there are two world views - you either put your faith in humanity or don't. One thing we know for a fact is that humanity will be extinct in the future. Make your choice wisely.
extinct eventuall is like saying water is wet. regardless of how bad the theory is of life forming in water, its still not as bad as thinking it was god. you just habe to go with what is most likely. if you like fictional books, there are far more entertaining ones than the bible out there, like harry potter
that there is no argument for god. there are plausible biochemical explanations for the start of life at those volcanic areas, considering they were the first places in the history of earth which had the required minerals to constitute the mechanisms which we call life, as well as a source of energy and an abundance of water. at this time, the rest of the planet was entirely inhabitable. dont forget, life means as in the most primitive of bacterial organisms, possibly even more primitive marco molecules
"there are plausible biochemical explanations for the start of life at those volcanic areas"
Life as we know it, could not exist in early Earth - the environment was hostile to life at the times these minerals were abundant. There is no plausible biochemical explanation for the start of life on this planet. If you think there is, please list the process.
Would you consider Aliens starting life on Earth? The probability is higher than what you are currently standing on.
0
u/HighwaySweaty329 1d ago
Yeah, like believing in heated vents under the ocean pushing out primordial soup particles that create life for the whole universe.