Abiogenesis is speculative, without evidence (Talk.Origins)

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

Response ArticleThis article (Abiogenesis is speculative, without evidence (Talk.Origins)) is a response to a rebuttal of a creationist claim published by Talk.Origins Archive under the title Index to Creationist Claims.

Claim CB050:

Abiogenesis is speculative without evidence. Since it has not been observed in the laboratory, it is not science.

Source:

• Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pp. 50-52.

CreationWiki response:

(Talk.Origins quotes in blue)

While this is true, part of scientific testing is falsification. Abiogenesis and theories thereof are not falsifiable since a negative result may just mean that the right conditions were not used. Simply put, there is no experimental or observational failure that would make the supporters of abiogenesis conclude that it is impossible. In fact scientific problems arising from areas like Thermodynamics and Information theory are dismissed as not applying to abiogenesis. This is because abiogenesis is a philosophical necessity of absolute naturalism, rather than a scientific concept.

True, but none of this work is even close to actual abiogenesis. The most this work has dealt with is the synthesis of amino acids and some simple proteins. None have shown synthesis of RNA and DNA, let alone the large degree of organized complexity in even the simplest of living cells.

While some real scientific work has been done in abiological synthesis of some of life’s basic building blocks, abiogenesis itself remains nothing but untestable speculation.

Responses to Anticreationist Assertions
Talk.Origins Index to Creationist Claims - responses to Index to Creationist Claims Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ - responses to Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ. Frequently Asked But Never Answered Questions - responses to FABNAQ. EvoWiki