Peanut Butter: Disproves Evolution?

[Tarquin Farquart]

http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Pea...s_Evolution%3F

Link didn't work, but was that the Chuck Missler video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504

Utterly amazing.

I'm yet to hear any scientist suggest that abiogenesis occurred in peanut butter.

[Nonny Mouse]

The problem is these guys are looking in the wrong place. You don't want a jar of peanut butter, you want a nice can of Campbell's Chunky Primordial Soup.

Nonny

I thought the banana dispoved evolution.....

Of course, the real humor in that video is they are using a man made hybrid fruit to show God's work....

[Tarquin Farquart]

Originally Posted by Nonny Mouse

The problem is these guys are looking in the wrong place. You don't want a jar of peanut butter, you want a nice can of Campbell's Chunky Primordial Soup.

Mmm.. primordial soup...

[Insensible Crier]

Peanut-Butter-a-chow

[AliBaba]

The problem is these guys are looking in the wrong place. You don't want a jar of peanut butter, you want a nice can of Campbell's Chunky Primordial Soup.

Damnit, Nonny, we've warned you about this. "Beverage down" warning labels must be attached to such posts.


Ali "and another keyboard ruined" Baba

[Eddylizard]

My theory is that lifeforms have actually developed spontaneously in jars of peanut butter. Sadly at its peak their civilisation died of peanut allergies long before the consumer opened the jar, leaving no trace.

Does anyone want to help fund a proper archaelogical dig into a jar of peanut butter? I fear that all previous attempts using a spoon or a knife have been too crude, and destroyed whateve artefacts the Peanutians may have left behind before they could be identified and studied.

Originally Posted by Eddylizard

My theory is that lifeforms have actually developed spontaneously in jars of peanut butter. Sadly at its peak their civilisation died of peanut allergies long before the consumer opened the jar, leaving no trace.

Does anyone want to help fund a proper archaelogical dig into a jar of peanut butter? I fear that all previous attempts using a spoon or a knife have been too crude, and destroyed whateve artefacts the Peanutians may have left behind before they could be identified and studied.

Actually if life came to be in a jar of peanut butter, wouldn't it likely have been eaten by a hoard of second graders long before peanut allergies evolved to whipe out their civilization?

I think the time line on your theory fails to recognize how fragile peanut butter based ecosystems truly are.

[Xia]

Originally Posted by Eddylizard

My theory is that lifeforms have actually developed spontaneously in jars of peanut butter. Sadly at its peak their civilisation died of peanut allergies long before the consumer opened the jar, leaving no trace.

We already have proof of lifeforms developing in jars on peanut butter. Cite here.

[RLS]

Peanut butter and banana sandwiches must really disprove evolution. I will begin my research immediatly

[remarkgullabull]

What about the mold that forms in the peanut butter after being exposed to heat?

Remark "Wouldn't leaving peanut butter and banana sandwiches about bring Elvis back? gullabull

[kappants]

These people give Christianity a bad name. As a Christian Pastor, I am flabbergasted by these idiotic people. The greatest miracle would be God creating a logic thought in their brains.

Originally Posted by remarkgullabull

Remark "Wouldn't leaving peanut butter and banana sandwiches about bring Elvis back? gullabull

Kind of like leaving milk and cookies out for Santa, but you do it on Jan 8 instead of Dec 25.

M "I made a peanut butter and banana sammich for Elvis, but I ated it" Raiford

[RichardM]

Originally Posted by kappants

The greatest miracle would be God creating a logic thought in their brains.

I must remember this.

[Mr. Billion]

I found this thread in the list of "related threads" at the bottom of a current thread. Hope nobody minds me bumping it.

It's probably just coincidence that this thread began in September 2007 and Scientific American had an article by Paul Davies on the same subject a couple months later.

The people in Tarquin's video are raising a legitimate question in a stupid, non-legitimate way. (And drawing incorrect conclusions from it). "If the conditions for life have existed on Earth and life arose once, why hasn't it arisen more than once?" That's actually a pretty good question. Maybe it HAS arisen more than once, independently.

Then the people in the video use the example of a jar of peanut butter: "Well, I don't see any new life forms springing into existence in this jar of peanut butter! Evolution is bunk! QED!"

The Scientific American article (with the sensationalist and misleading title "Are Aliens Among Us?") is not available online, but here's a short slideshow with some pretty but not informative artwork: http://www.scientificamerican.com/sl...liens-among-us

In his SA article, Davies argues that if such alternative life ever came to be, it may not still be alive. (Though he dismisses the argument that alternative life would likely have been out-competed by any previously established form of life.) If alternative life is still around, it would likely only exist as microbes (we'd probably have noticed macroscopic alternative life if it existed). Davies writes:

The vast majority of organisms are microbes, and it is almost impossible to tell what they are simply by looking at them through a microscope. Microbiologists must analyze the genetic sequences of an organism to determine its location on the tree of life--the phylogenetic grouping of all known creatures--and researchers have classified only a tiny fraction of all observed microbes.

To be sure, all the microbes that have so far been studied in detail almost certainly descended from a common origin. Known organisms share a similar biochemistry and use an almost identical genetic code, which is why biologists can sequence their genes and position them on a single tree. But the procedures that researchers use to analyze newly discovered organisms are deliberately customized to detect life as we know it. These techniques would fail to respond correctly to a different biochemistry.

So it could be that such microbes are still around but we haven't realized it yet. Davies points to the "nanobes" discovered by Philippa Uwins at University of Queensland in 1996. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanobe ) It's still not clear exactly what those things are. Maybe some new form of life, or maybe just some unusual type of crystals.

[fitz1980]

First, why do this idiots insist on confusing evolution with abiogenesis?

Second, if we do want to talk about abiogenesis than the scientists who study it will be the first to say that it's an incredibly rare phenomena since evolution and the study of DNA has proven that it's only happened one time during the billion year (or so) history of this planet.

Third, why would you expect a consumer product that's filled with preservatives and vacuum sealed in a jar to be anything like the conditions on Earth millions of years ago?

[Swordmaster]

My favorite part was when they called evolution a fairy tale.

Did you know that Creationists don't believe in irony? They think that Alanis Morrissette disproves it.

[fitz1980]

Isn't it ironic, doncha think?

[crocoduck_hunter]

Originally Posted by fitz1980

First, why do this idiots insist on confusing evolution with abiogenesis?

Hey, at least abiogenesis is a subset of biology. Some creationists also try to "disprove" evolution by claiming that it disproves the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (completely forgetting that Earth isn't a closed system- there's a constant source of incoming energy known as the Sun).

Second, if we do want to talk about abiogenesis than the scientists who study it will be the first to say that it's an incredibly rare phenomena since evolution and the study of DNA has proven that it's only happened one time during the billion year (or so) history of this planet.

Not quite. Scientists rarely say that something has been proven like that- the standard statement would be "all currently examined life forms have had genetic codes consistent with them having evolved from a single shared common ancestor" in order to allow for the possibility of discovering something that does not have such traits in the future.

Third, why would you expect a consumer product that's filled with preservatives and vacuum sealed in a jar to be anything like the conditions on Earth millions of years ago?

After several years of observation, I've decided that these people are surrounded by an invisible field that is impervious to logic.