|
Couple of quick thoughts on this subject :
1. Scientific interpretations of anything, but specifically the origination of life, also require and are based on faith. You have to believe that our interpretation of the data is correct, that the instruments are measuring what we think they are measuring, etc. If you follow that chain of logic out far enough, it all leads to faith on a set of beliefs as well. For example, a few thousand years ago we would be talking about things in terms of Fire, Earth, Wind and Spirit or something, before the idea of atoms and molecules was latched onto. In my opinion, science, like religion, is a tool to understand the world around us. In fact, most religions incorporate old science into their doctrines. I personally reject a strict adherence to either Creationism, or pure Evolution.
2. I read in a book called A Brief History of Everything by Ken Wilber, something akin to the following: That if you consider the permutation and combination of molecules to form the DNA structure of humans to have occured more or less randomly to find favored combinations for survival, that this process would take something on the order of a 100 billion years, minimum. Our best estimates are that the universe is 13 - 15 billion years old. Thus, there would not have been enough time for a process based on simple random chance to have produced us. I don't say that it's proof, but I think it's an interesting point that there is more going on than meets the analytical, objective eye of "science."
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|