a·bi·o·gen·e·sis   [ey-bahy-oh-jen-uh-sis, ab-ee-oh-] Show IPA
noun Biology.
the now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation.

maichem wrote:News to me...apparently abiogenesis is discredited. Can someone please enlighten me as to why a dictionary is making this claim

Such an inaccuracy ruffles my feathers since people hold dictionaries up as if they are in biblical light.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abiogenesis

a•bi•o•gen•e•sis   [ey-bahy-oh-jen-uh-sis, ab-ee-oh-] Show IPA
noun Biology.
the now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation.

T.H.Huxley (1870) wrote: And thus the hypothesis that living matter always arises by the agency of pre-existing living matter, took definite shape; and had, henceforward, a right to be considered and a claim to be refuted, in each particular case, before the production of living matter in any other way could be admitted by careful reasoners. It will be necessary for me to refer to this hypothesis so frequently, that, to save circumlocution, I shall call it the hypothesis of _Biogenesis_; and I shall term the contrary doctrine--that living matter may be produced by not living matter--the hypothesis of _Abiogenesis_.

T.H.Huxley (1870) wrote:The proposition that life may, and does, proceed from that which has no life, then, was held alike by the philosophers, the poets, and the people, of the most enlightened nations, eighteen hundred years ago; and it remained the accepted doctrine of learned and unlearned Europe, through the Middle Ages, down even to the seventeenth century.

T.H.Huxley (1870) wrote:
But if, in the present state of science, the alternative is offered us,--either germs can stand a greater heat than has been supposed, or the molecules of dead matter, for no valid or intelligible reason that is assigned, are able to re- arrange themselves into living bodies, exactly such as can be demonstrated to be frequently produced in another way,--I cannot understand how choice can be, even for a moment, doubtful.

T.H.Huxley (1870) wrote:
But though I cannot express this conviction of mine too strongly, I must carefully guard myself against the supposition that I intend to suggest that no such thing as Abiogenesis ever has taken place in the past, or ever will take place in the future. With organic chemistry, molecular physics, and physiology yet in their infancy, and every day making prodigious strides, I think it would be the height of presumption for any man to say that the conditions under which matter assumes the properties we call "vital" may not, some day, be artificially brought together. All I feel justified in affirming is, that I see no reason for believing that the feat has been performed yet.
And looking back through the prodigious vista of the past, I find no record of the commencement of life, and therefore I am devoid of any means of forming a definite conclusion as to the conditions of its appearance. Belief, in the scientific sense of the word, is a serious matter, and needs strong foundations. To say, therefore, in the admitted absence of evidence, that I have any belief as to the mode in which the existing forms of life have originated, would be using words in a wrong sense. But expectation is permissible where belief is not; and if it were given me to look beyond the abyss of geologically recorded time to the still more remote period when the earth was passing through physical and chemical conditions, which it can no more see again than a man can recall his infancy, I should expect to be a witness of the evolution of living protoplasm from not living matter. I should expect to see it appear under forms of great simplicity, endowed, like existing fungi, with the power of determining the formation of new protoplasm from such matters as ammonium carbonates, oxalates and tartrates, alkaline and earthy phosphates, and water, without the aid of light. That is the expectation to which analogical reasoning leads me; but I beg you once more to recollect that I have no right to call my opinion anything but an act of philosophical faith.

Your definition of Aboigenesis is inaccurate. It says:
"the now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation."

The definition given is for spontaneous generation, which itself is distinct from abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis it the hypothetical process by which biological matter first evolved from non-bilogical replicators. Importantly, this is not a discredited idea. Various hypotheses as to its mechanism have been proposed, a number of which have shown promise under experimental circumstances.

z8000783 wrote:It is not inaccurate it is wrong.

John

In natural science, abiogenesis (pronounced /ˌeɪbaɪ.ɵˈdʒɛnɨsɪs/ ay-by-oh-jen-ə-siss) or biopoesis is the study of how biological life arises from inorganic matter through natural processes, and the method by which life on Earth arose.

Your definition of Aboigenesis is wrong. It says:
"the now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation."

The definition given is for spontaneous generation, which itself is distinct from abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis it the hypothetical process by which biological matter first evolved from non-bilogical replicators. Importantly, this is not a discredited idea. Various hypotheses as to its mechanism have been proposed, a number of which have shown promise under experimental circumstances.

z8000783 wrote:

Your definition of Aboigenesis is wrong. It says:
"the now discredited theory that living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation."

The definition given is for spontaneous generation, which itself is distinct from abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis it the hypothetical process by which biological matter first evolved from non-bilogical replicators. Importantly, this is not a discredited idea. Various hypotheses as to its mechanism have been proposed, a number of which have shown promise under experimental circumstances.