Explaining the origin of first living organism?

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of building a building without a ground floor and building a theory without explaining the origin of the first living organism. The participants also mention the theory of evolution and its relationship to the origin of life, as well as the scientific method and the testability of theories. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the importance of understanding the purpose and limitations of scientific theories.
  • #1
farukmert
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer
Because it's not necessary, trying to compare the two is nonsense.
 
  • #3
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

because evolution only addresses what happens to an organism since the creation of life on earth. it is looking at the progression of life and the system that makes it operate, not how the organism got here.

you can insert god, space aliens, or anything else you like, but evolution does not care.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
doe snot? :yuck:

That and evolution isn't a physical structure. That kind of kills that comparison.
 
  • #5
Even though the challenge is specious, I'll point out that I've seen a lot of buildings without a ground floor. And that's not even counting tree-houses.
 
  • #6
good thing there is an edit :-D
 
  • #7
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer
Silly and flawed analogies are just that, not science.
 
  • #8
Creation?
 
  • #9
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer
You are right!

I cannot believe I ever believed in science, thanks for sheding some light :rolleyes:
 
  • #10
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

If that is the best argument you can come up with, please give up and leave us alone now.
 
  • #11
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

Evolution is how something evolves, not how it FIRST got there... A change in the DNA of a population.

It explains the process, and it makes perfect sense.
 
  • #12
Well, it looks like every who has replied here has a good grasp on it. The origin of life is not part of the theory of evolution. Evolution is how species change over time.

Trying to rebut evolution because we don't know how the first organism came to exist would be like rebutting the law of gravity because we don't know how the universe began.
 
  • #13
I'd like to point out that we have some good leads on how the first organism came to exist. Searching on PubMed with words like "Prebiotic chemistry" "RNA world" "origins of life" yields a wealth of reports.

Of course, I generally agree that this is a different area of scientific inquiry ... with the caveat that "survival of the fittest" could apply as well to self-replicating RNA molecules as it does to living organisms. It is possible that evolutionary processes may arguably predate life as we define it.
 
  • #14
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

I thought we already have a theory on that... but not really anything to do with Evolution.
 
  • #15
farukmert said:
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer
Heard of Electronics ?

It explains every detail of the working of your computer but guess what ... it doesn't tell you the name of the worker in an assembly plant in Indonesia who mounted the fan in the back of your case.
 
  • #16
Pengwuino said:
I thought we already have a theory on that... but not really anything to do with Evolution.
Does it have a testable prediction that would allow us to disprove it?
 
  • #17
pattylou said:
Does it have a testable and disprovable prediction?

Your the biologists! What are you asking me for :tongue2:

Isnt the theory like... something hits the Earth with this atom (florine?) and it combined with the other atoms necessary for life and after a while, life was created. Guess it doesn't really predict anything other then life is possible elsewhere.. and unless you want to start pelting planets that looked like Earth from waaaaay back then with meteorites, i don't think its realistically testable.

Scientific enough for you? Geez!
 
  • #18
Pengwuino said:
Your the biologists! What are you asking me for :tongue2:
Isnt the theory like... something hits the Earth with this atom (florine?) and it combined with the other atoms necessary for life and after a while, life was created. Guess it doesn't really predict anything other then life is possible elsewhere.. and unless you want to start pelting planets that looked like Earth from waaaaay back then with meteorites, i don't think its realistically testable.
Scientific enough for you? Geez!
Nah, that's great! Yes, it has a testable prediction. We ought to be able to disprove it.

I thought you were alluding to God and creationism. :biggrin:
 
  • #19
pattylou said:
Nah, that's great! Yes, it has a testable prediction. We ought to be able to disprove it.
I thought you were alluding to God and creationism. :biggrin:

Pff, typical :rolleyes:
 
  • #20
Gokul43201 said:
it doesn't tell you the name of the worker in an assembly plant in Indonesia who mounted the fan in the back of your case.
I'm not entirely convinced that there is a fan in his case.:tongue:
 

What is the theory of spontaneous generation?

The theory of spontaneous generation suggests that living organisms can arise from non-living matter through some kind of natural process.

What is the current scientific consensus on the origin of the first living organism?

The current scientific consensus is that the first living organism likely originated through a process known as abiogenesis, in which simple organic molecules combined and evolved into more complex forms of life.

What evidence supports the theory of abiogenesis?

Several lines of evidence support the theory of abiogenesis, including the Miller-Urey experiment, which showed that simple organic molecules can be formed in a simulated early Earth environment, as well as the discovery of ancient microbial fossils and the observation of similar processes occurring in present-day environments.

Can abiogenesis be replicated in a laboratory setting?

While scientists have successfully created simple organic molecules in laboratory experiments, the complete process of abiogenesis has not yet been replicated in a laboratory setting. However, ongoing research continues to shed light on the conditions and mechanisms that may have led to the origin of life.

Could the first living organism have originated from another planet?

Some scientists propose the theory of panspermia, which suggests that the first living organism may have originated from another planet and was brought to Earth through meteorites or other means. However, this theory is still being debated and more research is needed to support it.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
951
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
1K
Back
Top