Posts Tagged ‘abiogenesis’

In typical Joe Cienkowski fashion, tonight we’re getting a dose of his often repeated yarn that abiogenesis is spontaneous generation repackaged.

Abiogenesis is the opposite of spontaneous generation you filthy liar!

Since Louis Pasteur (who Joe is quick to remind you was a Christian) disproved spontaneous generation, Joe is suggesting that abiogenesis has also been disproved without ever having to dip his filthy toe in the water of evidence and science to do so.

Let’s get a little wikipedia review of spontaneous generation:

Spontaneous generation or Equivocal generation is an obsolete theory regarding the origin of life from inanimate matter, which held that this process was a commonplace and everyday occurrence, as distinguished from univocal generation, or reproduction from parent(s). The theory was synthesized by Aristotle[1], who compiled and expanded the work of prior natural philosophers and the various ancient explanations of the appearance of organisms; it held sway for two millennia. It is generally accepted to have been ultimately disproven in the 19th Century by the experiments of Louis Pasteur, expanding upon the experiments of other scientists before him (such as Francesco Redi who had performed similar experiments in the 17th century). Ultimately, it was succeeded by germ theory and cell theory.

Louis Pasteur’s 1859 experiment put the question to rest. He boiled a meat broth in a flask that had a long neck which curved downward, like a goose. The idea being that the bend in the neck prevented any particles from reaching the broth, while still allowing the free flow of air. The flask remained free of growth for an extended period. When the flask was turned so that particles could fall down the bends, the broth became quickly clouded.

and of abiogenesis:

In natural science, abiogenesis or biopoesis is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter [ed note: inanimate matter is not nothing as Joe suggests]. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how groups of already living things change over time, or with cosmogony, which covers how the universe might have arisen. Most amino acids, often called “the building blocks of life”, can form via natural chemical reactions unrelated to life, as demonstrated in the Miller–Urey experiment and similar experiments, which involved simulating some of the conditions of the early Earth, in a scientific laboratory.[1] In all living things, these amino acids are organized into proteins, and the construction of these proteins is mediated by nucleic acids. Which of these organic molecules first arose and how they formed the first life is the focus of abiogenesis.

As you can see, spontaneous generation literally means the generation of fully formed creatures. It was said that the recipe for forming a mouse was a piece of soiled cloth plus wheat for 21 days and the recipe for a scorpion was basil, placed between two bricks and left in sunlight. It was thought that rotting meat spontaneously generated maggots and that mud from the river banks spontaneously generated alligators. On the contrary, abiogenesis is a hypothesis that suggests that life arose from non-life via natural chemical processes. Here’s a video that might help you understand how:

As you can see, having fully formed organisms simply arising out of nothing is completely opposite of what abiogenesis is about. That makes Joe Cienkowski a filthy liar.

UPDATE: Lousy Canuck has another debunking of this filthy Joe Cienkowski lie.