Quote:
Originally Posted by bojan
Extrapolation is fine as a starting point, as a working hypothesis.. driving force ... like "This could be, lets see if it's true.." but is nowhere near proving something to be true.
|
That is my point but if we took the opposite position we would get nowhere I never said it was proof. But it is a lot closer to saying it does exist than saying it doesn't. I don't think that anyone can honestly say that there isn't more circumstantial evidence for life than circumstantial evidence for it not existing at some stage we have to say the balance is in favour of it being there somewhere while this is not proof it makes it more likely than not. That is my point it is a driving force while the view that it may not exist is a regressive force. Also there is evidence that life didn't start only once on earth but twice.
http://richarddawkins.net/discussion...once-but-twice