Renowned Chemist: Evolutionists Do Not Understand the Origin of Life

[Guest shiloh357]

Dr. James Tour is a well-known professor at Rice University, specializing in chemistry, nanoengineering, and computer science. Over the last 30 years, Tour has authored over 500 research publications, and he was recognized as one of “The 50 Most Influential Scientists in the World Today” by TheBestSchools.org. Tour has also received awards and recognitions from the American Chemical Society, Thomson Reuters, Honda, NASA, and others.

 

In a video released in late 2012, Tour explained that he has had extensive experience studying the origin of life.

“I will tell you as a scientist and a synthetic chemist,” Tour said, “if anybody should be able to understand evolution, it is me, because I make molecules for a living, and I don’t just buy a kit, and mix this and mix this, and get that. I mean, ab initio, I make molecules. I understand how hard it is to make molecules.”

 

(snip)

 

fter recognizing that evolutionists are “collectively bewildered” by life’s origins, Tour joined nearly 900 other scientists in signing A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism, which states: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

If evolution cannot account for life’s existence, then how did life originate? Tour says the most reasonable answer is simple.

“I believe fundamentally that God created us all,” he told the Houston Chronicle.

 

 

http://christiannews.net/2014/10/13/renowned-chemist-says-evolutionists-do-not-understand-the-origin-of-life/

[Willa]

It is very corrageous for these scientists to go against the flow of darwinism. I thank them for publicly taking this stand. They may not be burned at the stake for their stand but they are probably going to be put in stocks and have rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown at them--figuratively of course.

[gray wolf]

I did some further reading on Dr. Tour's views on jmtour.com and found it to be quite eye opening.  He offers some constructive criticism to not only evolutionists, but creationists as well.  Thanks Shiloh for this post bringing my attention to this remarkable, fellow chemist.

[Enoch2021]

I did some further reading on Dr. Tour's views on jmtour.com and found it to be quite eye opening.  He offers some constructive criticism to not only evolutionists, but creationists as well.  Thanks Shiloh for this post bringing my attention to this remarkable, fellow chemist.

 

 

=====================================================================================================

 

He offers some constructive criticism to not only evolutionists, but creationists as well.

 

For instance....?

 

 

And what "constructive criticism" does he offer for evolutionists...?

[gray wolf]

I would encourage you to visit Dr. Tour's website and read for yourself. Then we can discuss if you like. He's a very likable and honest guy.

[Enoch2021]

I would encourage you to visit Dr. Tour's website and read for yourself. Then we can discuss if you like. He's a very likable and honest guy.

 

 

I did before I posted my query...

 

That's why I asked:

 

For Instance.....? regarding his "constructive criticism" for Creationists.

 

And what "constructive criticism" does he offer for evolutionists...?

[gray wolf]

do you disagree that he posed some good objections/concerns? Maybe criticism is too strong a term. Why do you want me to post a summary? Better straight from the source.

http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-“theory”-and-the-christian-creationist-and-his-“science”/

 

It doesn't make a difference if your mind is made up before reading the material.

[Enoch2021]

do you disagree that he posed some good objections? Maybe criticism is too strong a term. Why do you want me to post a summary? Better straight from the source.

http://www.jmtour.com/personal-topics/the-scientist-and-his-“theory”-and-the-christian-creationist-and-his-“science”/

 

It doesn't make a difference if your mind is made up before reading the material.

 

 

========================================================================================================

 

All I want is for you to simply support your Assertions "Specifically":  "He offers some constructive criticism to not only evolutionists, but creationists as well".

 

As I said, I've already read through the material.  Even though he has signed a "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism", He's A "Fence Rider" Publicly, IMHO....As Evidenced By:

 

Dr. Tour....."Assuming that I have something significant to contribute to the evolution vs. creation debate, many ask me to speak and write concerning my thoughts on the topic. However, I do not have anything substantive to say about it. I am a layman on the subject."

 

If he's a layman on the subject while being a professor at Rice University, specializing in chemistry, nanoengineering, and computer science.....then I'm a Mau Mau Fighter Pilot.

 

And this....

 

Dr Tour...."I have been labeled as an Intelligent Design (ID) proponent. I am not. I do not know how to use science to prove intelligent design although some others might. I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion."

 

Allow me to assist him with the "Scientific Proof/Evidence".....

 

DNA/RNA/"Functional Proteins" NEVER spontaneously form "naturally", outside already existing cells, from Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Aminos, respectively.

It's Physically and Chemically IMPOSSIBLE.

That's just the Hardware!

 

DNA "CODE"/Software------------------Design(Intelligence)--------------------Designer!

 

To refute:

 

1. Prove that the Genetic CODE is not....."CODE"/Software. OR....

2. Prove that Atoms/Molecules have Sentience and Intelligence.

 

1. Observe a Phenomenon: The Genetic "CODE"--- "Functional Protein" Synthesis.

2. Lit Review: Million of examples "CODE"/Software that seemingly only originate from Intelligence. hmm

3. Hypothesis: "CODE" does not originate from non-sentient/non-intelligent sources.

4. TEST/Experiment: Create an Intelligible "CODE"...

(Dependent Variable): Intelligible CODE Created.

(Independent Variable): Ask Politely...Create a "CODE ?" to: Wind, Waves, Tornadoes, Rocks, Mud, Hurricanes, Eclipses, Landslides, Earthquakes, Thunderstorms, Sunlight, Moonlight, Volcanic Eruptions, ect, Then monitor/record each.

Tools: Pen/Paper/Keyboard/Abacus lol

5. Analyze Data: No intelligible CODE.

6. Hypothesis: VALIDATED: No Intelligible CODE originated.

7: Report Results: Information "CODE" is the sine qua non of life = GOD.

 

Supplemental-- does DNA/RNA/"Functional Proteins" (The Hardware) spontaneously form "naturally" from Sugars, Bases, Phosphates, and Amino's respectively?

Lit Review (Metric Tons) and Basic Biochemistry: Laughingly...."NOPE". GOD!!

 

Supplemental: --can Matter/Energy create itself? That would require it EXISTING prior to it's EXISTENCE.

Lit Review: ---1LOT: Laughingly....."NOPE". GOD!!

 

Appears he's gonna have to Change His Opinion.

 

The End.

[gray wolf]

No I don't think it's the end by any means. I think we are still beginning to understand and we should not be so quick to write off good research. God's universe is more wonderful and mysterious that we can imagine.

You can have the last word.

[Enoch2021]

Lol, you've posted that before.  I am a layman too, on the evolution debate.  I don't think the debates ever accomplish anything substantive.  We must consider the evidence and seek the truth, however that might conflict with our presuppositions in either case.

 

I think it's the first time I unleashed the Step By Step: "Code" hypothesis and Validation.

 

The Beauty of The "CODE" argument is you really don't need much of a "Formal" education in any of the "Sciences" whatsoever.  I Reckon an IQ of 30-40 range will just about do it.  Echoes...

 

(Matthew 11:25) "At that time Jesus answered and said,  I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."

 

This is a Profound Verse...and speaks to something (and is quite Relevant to our current discussion) that has troubled me for some time and continues to; that is, I've met many "Wise and Learned" and had discussions concerning these issues....AND, they can't see it!  The Implication here is that Almighty GOD has a say on who HE reveals and continues to reveal...  Makes Sense...and is the only Logical Explanation I can come up with.

 

However, the 1st Chapter of Romans reveals without a doubt that ALL (Above the age of accountability) know it and afforded the Opportunity @ some point. 

 

I disagree on the Debate issue.  It requires some discernment skills and the ability to put aside Presuppositions (That we ALL have) but I think they can be productive to a point.

 

The evidence is the easy part, IMHO.