REPLY #37 TO
"EVOLUTION VS. CREATIONISM"
are parts of the original essay (or a subsequent reply) to which the respondent has directed his comments.
prefaced by (R) are those of the respondent and are presented unedited.
My replies appear under the respondent's comments in blue text
and are prefaced by my initials (MB)
(R) In regards to your reply #22, the person states that evolution sounds
like mumbo-jumbo because it is quite obvious to the person that life did not
spring from nothing. You then correct him, pointing out that life is formed
from the same elements as the nonliving world.
This is an incredible statement. It is akin to stating
that there is no difference between an automobile and iron ore, aluminum ore and
the crude oil use to form plastics since all are composed of the same
(MB)At the most basic level, there *is* no difference.
All are composed of the very same atomic and sub-atomic particles which don't
change their properties when they combine in different ways to form different
things. At this level, there can be no difference between living and non-living
things, so there is no need to dispute that life can come from
(R) What the difference is, is a vastly higher level of information content
and DESIGN. This evolution does not explain, except by smoke and mirrors and
(MB)Evolution doesn't explain this because there's nothing
substantive here that needs to be explained. There is no evidence of any
special design or of anything that could not have arisen by natural processes.
As for "information content", there is no more "information" in the component
particles of a human being than in an undifferentiated pile of non-living
particles. Indeed, a living creature and the same creature who is dead contain
exactly the same amount of information.