Merits

[Glenn]

" the merits of [a] hypothesis do not fall or rise on the ability of a given critic to provide a more “productive” explanation."

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/origin-of-life-researcher-admits-its-a-long-long-way-to-luca/

True or false?

[RonO]

Why does this denial matter when biological evolution is still a fact of
nature that has been going on for billions of years? What is wrong with
what Luskin claims about ID and how it should be defended?

https://evolutionnews.org/2021/12/what-is-intelligent-design-and-how-should-we-defend-it/

Behe will tell you that this denial about the origin of life has nothing
to do with biological evolution being a fact of nature. Why put up the
IC denial and not understand what Behe is actually telling you about
reality?

https://evolutionnews.org/2022/08/behe-debates-the-limits-of-darwinian-evolution/

11 minutes in you would understand what Behe is telling you about his IC
and how it fits into the evolution of life on earth.

Wallowing in denial doesn't change reality. Luskin understand that, but
can't take his own advice.

Ron Okimoto

[Dale]

hypothesis is reversible conjecture

what I remember from Logic 101

--
Mystery? -> https://www.dalekelly.org/

[Kalkidas]

True.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2022-10-30 18:19:30 +0000, RonO said:

> On 10/30/2022 1:00 PM, Glenn wrote:
>> " the merits of [a] hypothesis do not fall or rise on the ability of a

>> given critic to provide a more “productive†explanation."

>>
>> https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/origin-of-life-researcher-admits-its-a-long-long-way-to-luca/
>>
>>
>> True or false?
>>
>
> Why does this denial matter when biological evolution is still a fact
> of nature that has been going on for billions of years? What is wrong
> with what Luskin claims about ID and how it should be defended?

It's probably a waste of time trying to discuss anything with Glenn,
because, as you have often pointed out, he makes no effort to
understand or discuss what he posts, but let's try anyway. Why
"admits"? This seems to imply that people have argued otherwise and
that in some way a recent LUCA means that god-did-it. Why? Who has
argued for an early LUCA? OK, Bill Martin puts LUCA a lot earlier than
I would [Life before LUCA, J. Theor. Biol. 434, 68–74 (2017)] but I
suspect that he's in a minority, and anyway, I doubt whether proof of a
recent LUCA would make him hold up his hands in horror and accept that
creationism is right after all.

>
> https://evolutionnews.org/2021/12/what-is-intelligent-design-and-how-should-we-defend-it/
>
>
> Behe will tell you that this denial about the origin of life has
> nothing to do with biological evolution being a fact of nature. Why
> put up the IC denial and not understand what Behe is actually telling
> you about reality?
>
> https://evolutionnews.org/2022/08/behe-debates-the-limits-of-darwinian-evolution/
>
>
> 11 minutes in you would understand what Behe is telling you about his
> IC and how it fits into the evolution of life on earth.
>
> Wallowing in denial doesn't change reality. Luskin understand that,
> but can't take his own advice.
>
> Ron Okimoto

--
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[jillery]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:

>" the merits of [a] hypothesis do not fall or rise on the ability of a given critic to provide a more “productive” explanation."
>
>https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/origin-of-life-researcher-admits-its-a-long-long-way-to-luca/
>
>True or false?

Yes.

--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.

[peter2...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:20:08 PM UTC-4, Ron O wrote:
> On 10/30/2022 1:00 PM, Glenn wrote:
> > " the merits of [a] hypothesis do not fall or rise on the ability of a given critic to provide a more “productive” explanation."
> >
> > https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/origin-of-life-researcher-admits-its-a-long-long-way-to-luca/
> >
> > True or false?
> >
> Why does this denial matter when biological evolution is still a fact of
> nature that has been going on for billions of years?

Only RonO would think biological evolution is relevant to
an article critiquing Sutherland's claim that we
are close to the "end of the first step" in ABIOGENESIS.

Only RonO would do this while ignoring the fact that the first step,
as Sutherland sees it, is the synthesis, under prebiotic
conditions, of mere *pyrimidines* -- nucleotides that
are single molecules of RNA and DNA, and are powerless
to replicate in the absence of *purines*, the complementary
nucleotides that are noticeably MORE complicated than the pyrimidines.

Only RonO would ignore the fact that the article
that Glenn linked is a powerful critique of the alleged
"prebiotic conditions", quoting such heavyweights of
abiogenesis as Shapiro on the unrealistic conditions under
which Sutherland's experiments were done.


Most amusing of all, only RonO would use the words
"this denial" in response to what Glenn wrote, which ended
in "True or false"?


Only Ron O, of all the talk.origins regulars I've encountered
since my return to t.o. in December 2010, is so out of touch
with reality.


Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

[RonO]

On 11/23/2022 2:49 PM, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:20:08 PM UTC-4, Ron O wrote:
>> On 10/30/2022 1:00 PM, Glenn wrote:
>>> " the merits of [a] hypothesis do not fall or rise on the ability of a given critic to provide a more “productive” explanation."
>>>
>>> https://evolutionnews.org/2017/07/origin-of-life-researcher-admits-its-a-long-long-way-to-luca/
>>>
>>> True or false?
>>>
>> Why does this denial matter when biological evolution is still a fact of
>> nature that has been going on for billions of years?
>
> Only RonO would think biological evolution is relevant to
> an article critiquing Sutherland's claim that we
> are close to the "end of the first step" in ABIOGENESIS.

What a nut job. You really are going to run from the post that you
claimed that you would address, but what are you doing instead?

The sad thing is that I was only trying to give Glenn a hint that he had
posted one of the Top Six. I think he got the hint because he ran.
What does that tell you?

Ron Okimoto

[Glenn]

Then there is Bill Rogers who claims Ron is "right"...
>
>

[RonO]

You could just explain to Nyikos why you managed to put up 4 threads
involving the Top Six (within a weeks time span) that you have been
running from for the last 5 years instead of run in denial of what you
have done.

Nyikos needs to know why you were stupid enough to do such a thing so
that he might better defend himself against the lies that he has started
to tell about the events.

Ron Okimoto

>>
>>
>

["\"Ron.Dean\" <\"h,r...@fx18.iad.omicronmedia.com]

Hello I'm back!

[Lawyer Daggett]

Welcome back. I hope you're healthy on this fine Thanksgiving Day.
May your turkey be moist and your stuffing tasty.

[Martin Harran]

Your 'From't line suggests that you may have started celebrating
Thanksgiving already :)

[jillery]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2022 11:51:10 -0500, "\"Ron.Dean\"
<\"h,ron.dean\"@gmail.com"@fx18.iad.omicronmedia.com wrote:

Welcome, back. Do you have a sibling named front?

So reports of your demise were premature?