Talk:Origin of life
Contents |
[edit] Title
I know this is a new article, work in progress and all, but isn't it more "Origin of the Universe"?--Bobbing up 11:59, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
- I thought so too, but I don't think we should change it as its obviously a work in progress and the next sections may prove truer to the title than the existing ones. Plus the author has obviously put a lot of work into it, we should perhaps wait until he has a chance to defend his title.--Damo2353 12:03, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
- I agree completely.--Bobbing up 12:32, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
- Thank you for your input regarding this title. While I did initially intend to write an article on the scientific origin of life, it appears that Abiogenesis (Spelling?) already covered that. I guess the Origin of the Universe thingy might make sense... until you consider the fact that the myths don't describe the origin of the universe... Meh... I am more confused now than any CP article ever has made me... Javascap 19:57, 7 July 2008 (EDT)
- I agree completely.--Bobbing up 12:32, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
The title shouldn't be capitalized. I removed some really vague nattering about the formation of the universe after giving up on healing it. We can just start at the age of the earth, really... ħuman
21:30, 7 July 2008 (EDT)
[edit] Removal of BoN edit
I just removed a load of apparent Wikipedia copying 21:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Off Earth
Shouldn't this article discuss the idea that life on Earth, well, originated elsewhere. There is some reasonable scientific evidence to suggest this possibility.— Unsigned, by: 193.39.159.73 / talk / contribs
- Curious, but wouldn't that still mean that the same arguments for how life originated were in place - just on some different world?
Godot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 17:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Well - yes. But what is this "reasonable scientific evidence". I'm not saying it doesn't exit - I'm just wondering what it is.--Bob"I thought this was supposed to be "Rational" Wiki?." 18:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
[edit] Somebody clutching at straws here.
Under Judeo-Christian we have: nowhere does the Bible mention when the creation took place, or even discuss how long the days were. Some creationist (sic) do believe the Earth to be billions of years old.
It's certainly true that the bible does not have an appendix telling us what every word means, but to suggest that as "day" is not explicitly defined then it might mean any time period you care to mention is pretty absurd.
"Adam" was a man. But "man" is also not defined. So that would presumably allow us to define "man" as a single-celled organism and say that the bible supports human evolution.--Coffee (talk) 09:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)