---------------------------------------------------------------------------
**** http://www.GOANET.org ****
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goanet joins Noel Rebello to raise money for Daddy's Home (Margao, Goa)
Sponsor Noel as he climbs Mt. Kilimanjaro (5,882m or 19,298 ft)
Make a donation at www.Goanet.org, click on MAKE A DONATION,
state "Daddy's Home" in the Donation comments
For more information see: http://bit.ly/SupportDaddysHome
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel duty bound to tell those who want to learn how science has already
explained life as a natural phenomenon, and answer genuine scientific
questions. I have nothing to say about an individual's personal faith-based
beliefs, and the contorted arguments he/she engages in to protect the sanctity
of those beliefs at any cost. Examples of such individualistic personal beliefs
and the tautological arguments offered to protect them are:
"Because ‘Life’ is something beyond human comprehension, at least so far.
Which deduces that : Science cannot explain ‘Life’."
.....Dr. dos Reis Falcão
Earlier this same author claimed that he could comprehend what life does.
Please see these quotes:
2. " It is ‘Life’ that initiates all these physical and chemical
processes and not vice-versa."
.....Dr. dos Reis Falcão
3. It is ‘Life’ that creates these chemicals within the cells and body
of the living substance.
.....Dr. dos Reis Falcão
He also claimed that life was abstract, whatever the heck that means.
Please note that these beliefs are entirely personal and idiosyncratic, not
supported by any external rationale, evidence or research by genuinely
knowledgeable people in the field. Anybody can concoct their own meaning of the
word life, and claim that it is beyond human comprehension. They can claim that
life is a misty magical demon from the mysterious land of Oz that science will
never explain. Indeed, if you believe that life is a supernatural phenomenon,
then science will never care to provide you with an explanation. Why would you
even bother to look towards science for answers? This contention should become
clear further from the following statements of faith-based personal parochial
beliefs:
QUOTE
As we have seen, the scientific evidence confirms that “in the beginning, God
created [...] .” Life cannot come from nonlife; only God can create life. True
science and the Bible will always agree. Whether in biology, astronomy,
geology, or any other field of study, we can trust God’s Word to be accurate
when it speaks about these topics. Let us stand up for the truth of Genesis and
take back our culture.
UNQUOTE
.....Fr. Ivo
QUOTE
A scientist believes in phenomenon and adamantly refuses to believe until ‘The
first cause’ or ‘God’ is proven as a fact.
UNQUOTE
.....Charudatta Prabhudesai
It is clear to me that the authors quoted above do not really want science to
explain life, and would never trust science, even if I rubbed all the hard
scientific evidence in their faces, including creating the first artificial
living organism in the laboratory. So why bother?
But to others who might care to listen, let me point out that the three
rhetorical questions asked in a dismissive manner in the post appended below,
have already been answered. Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão simply does not have
that knowledge, apparently, and quite understandably, because he has not read
the relevant scientific literature.
The questions are embedded in the following quote:
QUOTE
What makes the living cells produce chemicals, what makes and regulates
physical structures, what makes genes to design cells in certain format. That
is what is the noun “LIFE” which no human or computer has explained.
UNQUOTE
.....Dr. dos Reis Falcão
The answer to the first question is that living cells contain within them a
bootstrapped self-assembled molecular machinery performing in a step by step
manner complex chemical reactions to synthesize all the chemicals needed to
keep the cell functioning normally.
The answer to the second question is obvious. It is the complex macromolecular
chemicals synthesized in the above manner that make and regulate physical
structures by various processes involving self-assembly and self-organization.
This has been demonstrated in many different kinds of test tube and culture
dish experiments.
The answer to the third question is that genes carry molecular templates based
on a triplet code, for generating a huge diversity of protein molecules, which
can serve as structural as well as functional components in various specific
types of self-assembly processes that create the overall structure of each
cell. The repertoire of genes that are turned on or off in each cell is
triggered by various chemicals, both inside and outside the cell.
Cheers,
Santosh
--- On Sun, 9/19/10, Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> RESPONSE : This
> is the exact ignorance that I wanted to elicit.
> Because ‘Life’ is something beyond human
> comprehension, at least so far.
> Which deduces that : Science cannot explain
> ‘Life’.
>
> SANTOSH HELEKAR wrote: <<< The distinction being
> drawn here is utterly meaningless. If science has explained
> what
> makes a substance a "living" substance, it has by
> definition explained what "life" is. If one understands the
>
> meaning of an adjective i.e. "living", it follows logically
> that one also understands the meaning of the noun
> from which it is derived……… The word "life" has no
> explanatory value. It was a noun that was coined in the
> pre-scientific age to refer to…..>>>
>
> RESPONSE : So, in other words ‘Life’ is from
> pre-scientific
> age which you at present age still affirm that
> “Science has already
> explained life as a natural phenomenon.”
>
> I do not think this thread anyone said that scientist
> cannot
> explain what ‘living substance’ is; but what ‘Life’
> is.
> What makes the living
> cells produce chemicals, what makes and regulates physical
> structures, what
> makes genes to design cells in certain format.
> That is what is the noun “LIFE”
> which no human or computer has explained.
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão.
>
