Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

Durro wrote:Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

Fine by me, but I'm pretty much done. I've made my point and there is no honest intention to explore the issue, so it might be a waste of time.

Ok, we'll just let this thread fade away into fond distant memories...

Seth wrote:

Durro wrote:Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

Fine by me, but I'm pretty much done. I've made my point and there is no honest intention to explore the issue, so it might be a waste of time.

Unlike what Seth thinks, science is lead by evidence, not navel gazing making-shit-up philosofuckery.

Durro wrote:Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

.

Seth wrote:

Durro wrote:Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

Fine by me, but I'm pretty much done. I've made my point and there is no honest intention to explore the issue, so it might be a waste of time.

I agree, and there never was an honest intention to explore the issue, especially as the issue was a stalking horse.

Spearthrower wrote:

Seth wrote:

Durro wrote:Guys, if we're going to continue down the path of assessing logic and the scientific method, perhaps it might be time to split off the discussion into its own fascinating thread. We seem to be drifting away from Abiogenesis.

Durro

Fine by me, but I'm pretty much done. I've made my point and there is no honest intention to explore the issue, so it might be a waste of time.

I agree, and there never was an honest intention to explore the issue, especially as the issue was a stalking horse.

Speak for yourself.
I was always prepared to discuss this issue honestly.

I didn't think you were coming back to this thread. That's twice now since your publicly announced "departure".

FYI, Spearthrower was referring to Seth, not to any other member. But if you are prepared to discuss things honestly without evasions, trolling or antagonistic behaviour, you'd be more than welcome to rejoin the discussion.

Durro

Durro wrote:I didn't think you were coming back to this thread. That's twice now since your publicly announced "departure".

FYI, Spearthrower was referring to Seth, not to any other member. But if you are prepared to discuss things honestly without evasions, trolling or antagonistic behaviour, you'd be more than welcome to rejoin the discussion.

Durro

No worries then, if the remark wasn't aimed at me.

...as you were.

Of course it wasn't aimed at you. That's because it wasn't I who posted it.

Well, I wouldn't mind seeing some constructive discussion, particularly on current frontiers for this research.

Alan C wrote:Well, I wouldn't mind seeing some constructive discussion, particularly on current frontiers for this research.

Well I never felt this thread was much of a discussion on the subject... and I don't see why a thread on the non-biological origins of life would belong in general debunking.

I actually think this is a much better thread on the subject.

Rumraket wrote:

Alan C wrote:Well, I wouldn't mind seeing some constructive discussion, particularly on current frontiers for this research.

Well I never felt this thread was much of a discussion on the subject... and I don't see why a thread on the non-biological origins of life would belong in general debunking.

I actually think this is a much better thread on the subject.

Ah yes, I forgot all about that one.

Hey! Anything new of note in the research literature on this subject? Never mind. I see there is a better thread.