A Non Sequitur Experiment Over 100 Years Old Somehow Refutes Evolution

Posted: August 17, 2013 in religion, science
Tags: , , , , , ,

David Rives has another video under the headline, “Scientific Experiment Refutes Evolution.” The sub-title is just precious: “Exclusive: David Rives recalls Louis Pasteur’s challenge to Darwin.”

The two-minute video (at least they’re short!) explains that the famous biologist Louis Pasteur (who we can thank for the pasteurization process that prevents a lot of food spoilage) was apparently dead-set against Darwinism … err, evolution, when it was first proposed by Darwin. So he designed an experiment to disprove it: Pasteur pasteurized some liquid and put it in a sealed container and with nothing allowed into the container, life did not start. Zero genesis of anything, and therefore zero evolution.

Wow. If you need a dictionary example of a non sequitur, this is it. But, it’s a favorite of creationists to think that origin of life studies have something to do with evolution. They don’t. Evolution is a theory that describes what happens to life after it is there. It has nothing to do with origin of life. Nothing.

An intellectually astute commenter – with whom I have no relation – named “Arch” pointed this out, starting with:

I love this site and sharing God’s love, but this is ridiculous. Please, David, catch up with the times! An experiment over 100 years ago based on the understanding of a process >100 years ago doesn’t say anything about the current state of the science! Evolution has nothing to do with origins of life, and a sterilized, sealed, small container that has no other inputs to the system says nothing about Earth’s environment in the distant past. This video is pretty embarrassing to all Christians.

Arch makes an excellent point. And currently has 7 up and 7 down votes for it. “Avenger” was the first to respond (and has 4 up and 3 down) with this:

Let me get this right: you out-of-hand reject Pasteur’s experiment because it was done over 100 years ago and based on the understanding of the time. Yet, evolution is based on a speculation that is also over 100 years old. Pasteur’s experiment, showing that abiogenesis never happens, has been replicated thousands of times in the last 100 years. Evolutionary speculation has never been observed in nature and has never been replicated. You seem to choose speculation as fact and fact as too old to count. Amazing how much indoctrination it takes to make one stupid.

Yes, amazing how much indoctrination it takes to make one stupid. I agree.

“Disciple” agreed with “Avenger” with:

The Bible has much to say of our origins, and unlike the theories of man, the scriptures have never changed. God created the world in six 24-hour days, Adam was the first man, death entered the world through sin, and there was a literal global flood. Not only is the evolutionary paradigm antagonistic towards the scriptures, but it attempts to undermine the Gospel message.

God bless.

Love that last part. Earned him 8 up and 4 down votes. “Arch” responded:

But that’s irrelevant here — If David wanted to argue against Darwin and this were 1860, that’s fine, it’s like arguing that Newton’s laws can’t explain the motion of Mercury therefore it’s God’s hand perturbing it to show us His wonders. But then in the first two decades of the 1900s, relativity was formulated and it perfectly explains Mercury’s orbit, hence active divine intervention is no longer needed. Similarly, this is using an outdated idea of the theory of evolution and arguing against that (and not even evolution since it’s origins stuff that evolution has nothing to do with). Anyone who knows what biologists are saying today would just roll their eyes at David, which does nothing to advance his cause. If David really wanted to spread God’s word and love, he would look at what evolutionists are saying NOW, not >100 years ago, and show how God is actually needed to explain things and that science can’t. Not do some straw man argument.

4 up and 1 down. “Avenger” replied:

At its most basic level evolution says that one species changed into another, and that species into another, etc. all by random chance without any input of intelligence. Science has failed every attempt to prove this has ever happened, offering only speculation as to maybe how it could have happened. When a writer says that a Princess kissed a frog and it turned into a Prince, you say that’s a fairy-tale; when a biologist says that frogs turned into Princes, you say that is science.

4 up and 4 down. To this, “Arch” responded again, in a very calm and measured manner that makes me think he’s an all-around good guy:

Let me be very clear because you are not understanding my point:

1. David claims that Pasteur’s experiment disproves evolution.

2. Pasteur’s experiment was to study abiogenesis in a way that no scientist today thinks it happened.

3. Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution and nothing to do with what Darwin argued.

4. Therefore, David Rives has not said anything about evolution, rather instead he’s set up a straw man to argue against and is in effect violating the Commandment of not bearing false witness.

Not sure how I could be more clear in this point that I’m not arguing for evolution, I’m arguing that David’s claim has nothing to do with what he says it does.

He got 5 up votes and 0 down votes for that. Avenger responded again trying to state that origins = evolution, to which Arch finally replied, “Sorry, you’re just wrong. Origins ≠ evolution. No point in me posting about this anymore since you’re not getting it.”

In general, the rest of the comments are about as mixed as that discussion. This is why I almost “enjoy” David’s videos because they actually bring out some commenters that realize that he’s just full of s—.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s