"Sorry, But My Paper Refutes You" | Sy Garte Encounters Informed Caller on Abiogenesis

Thanks for having me on! Sy and I have agreed to discuss all 3 of his points in a more in-depth discussion in September. It will be on my channel for now, but obviously if you wanted to host it I think we would both agree

James Tour already shredded this case that uses “autocatalysis”. I’m sure this guest will be better than “professor” Dave though. Pretty low bar, if I’m being honest lol

I only watch this channel to avoid being in an echo chamber. I do watch them and read through the comments, but I don't usually feel like I get anything from them except a clearer picture of what people who hold the Christian world-view really think. That being said, I did enjoy this one.

If matter could spontaneously organize itself contrary to physical laws, it would not be such a difficult venture to prove the possibility.

The fascinating thing is: The genetic code is the digital code, like software. It is what we KNOW that points to - in the words of Max Planck - a "conscious intelligent mind" behind the universe.

Everytime i think i abiogenesis, i think of that slide your one guest showed on your one video from a John Sutherland paper showing all the chemical reactions necessary for life. One of the smartest abiogenesis researching chemists in the world. It's a miracle we exist, whether naturally or directly.

The kid's 'proof' is 'peer reviewed chemistry artiles, lol. Dr. James Tour, arguably the greatest chemist alive, has destroyed all of them comprehensively.

I worry that arguing that science will never be able to explain the origin of life is a God of the gaps argument. Now that I got to the end of the video I see it seems Dr. Garte is not arguing this. I’ve always felt if it turns out we can explain the origin of life through natural processes that in no way disproves God. In fact I’d argue not being able to explain life without deferring to some supernatural creator would be a version of that creator forcing his belief on us and in a way taking away our freedom. I say evolution doesn’t disprove God because, if true, the end result is humanity, mind, consciousness. The possibilities are also endless which suggests to me an infinite creator. And also I do not fear this theory because of the Resurrection. There’s so much evidence that Christ resurrected and if that really happened then what have we to fear?

Abiogenesis is impossible.

This how to jumpstart you YouTube income stream - talk about big claims and debate big names to formulate a sense of personal relevance.

There’s no way that biological material organized itself and self-replicated. It’s far too volatile. Perhaps we will find the origin of life equation, but it will require supernatural resources.

I don’t understand the claim of abiogenesis if it were proved that it happened. Let me give an analogy- I’m mixing two chemicals in a beaker. Inside the beaker, I can explain by purely natural and statistical models, the reactions taking place. If i have a total understanding of the chemical reactions and the resultant , does this imply that I wasn’t the one doing the experiment and further that I don’t exist?

sometimes i swear these atheist don't even read the sources they sight as often it doesn't say what they think it says they like skim through the thing and often think that it somehow confirms something it doesn't maybe if they read things without their confirmation bias glasses on and it full detail this might not happen

James Tour

Nothing concrete here for abiogenesis. No turkeys flew out of the imaginary pond. Such nonsense. The young man should debate Dr. Tour, but perhaps he won't.

So he admitted that he already believes in god by faith and he uses this to go "further than that", so how can it be evidence of a god according to him?

Survival of the fittest presumes arrival of the fit.

It is funny that some people here just drop "James Tour" as if it refutes Abiogenesis. How much do you want to bet that most of these people don't understand the topic at all? Tour is not an origin of life researcher. It is not his field. The consensus among the actual experts in that field is that Abiogenesis is possible based on the data. We all know why you want Tour to be right and you don't care how dishonest that guy is.

Abiogenesis does not jive with cell theory. Cells only come from cells.

There is no genetic genome that allows for evolution and so a cat cannot evolve into a dog or vice versa and that goes for every living thing and this begs the question how did everything change and this is down to our DNA and the leading professor on this subject is Denis noble