Abiogenesis Deconstructed

In an age when public science is largely a scam, and real scientists are defunded, sacked and marginalised, here is another turf war: the origin of life theory.

Abiogenesis is the origin of life from non-living matter.

For the general public, who cannot tell the difference between theatre and reality, here is a sobering quote.

Steve Benner in 2021, he said to Dave Farina,[...] "I suppose most of the many of the big paradoxes in the origin of Life have been solved." Like none of them have been solved. But to the professionals in 2019, in a talk, it's all on YouTube, he said,"Chemistry is actually hard to get to work. The molecules precipitate. The molecules hydrolyze. The molecules decompose. So it's very much a constraint that you have to deal with... it's one goddamn problem after another." I guess he did mention God.

This is what he says to the experts because he's a real chemist. He knows we can't even get the molecules made. But that's not what he tells the world. Remember, he's the guy saying: you know, we figured this out, you know this is good, it's life on Earth, Life on Mars. I mean, it's all here, here's 41 textbooks talking about the primordial soup model.

Below, or above, the scientific battles, are the philosophical wars. In this particular case, it is a clash between materialist abiogenesis and Christian creationism (in its broadest sense). But, for science to be truly experimental - empirical, experiential - it needs neither of those two metaphysical postures.

It takes a long time and deep forensic work to highlight the more blatant scientific scams. One favourite gambit is to quote a previous paper. How many people ever go back to read that previous paper? How many of those are baffled to discover that the paper says no such thing? Happens a lot. How many then go back and call out the first paper for misquoting?

Criticism is important. Critics are important. Just because an accepted theory is shown to be wrong, does not mean that a critic must have some replacement theory. This seems to be a prevalent human characteristic. The "can you do any better?" syndrome. That is the wrong question, that aims to deflect attention away from the criticisms. A theory is not correct by virtue of there being no better alternatives.

A world of psychopathic technocrats indoctrinating a mass of stupid scifids - that's what you get for not paying attention.