Quote:
Originally Posted by Herb
Madbadgalaxyman wrote
"Has Cox completed at least a few units of cellular and molecular biology at university? If not, I suggest that his views about the prevalence of life in the universe should be given little weight. You really need to have some tertiary biology to appreciate how 'super high tech' life really is."
Thankfully, some of the greatest amateurs in the history of science ignored arrogant attitudes such as this and built the very foundations of scientific knowledge.
Herb
|
It is not arrogant to assume that a detailed knowledge of molecular biology and cell biology and evolutionary biology (and much else) is necessary in order to have an informed view about the existence of life in the universe.
If someone's 'amateur' knowledge of biology does not include the knowledge gradually built up and tested over the last 600 years of biological research by means of observation, dissection, experiment, simulation, and hypothesis, then just about any random opinion about life can be entertained by such a person.
Amateur life science research is possible, but you really do have to understand a lot before you have any idea about how life actually works.
I do not mean to say that you have to get this knowledge by going to university, but I can say (from personal experience of having completed some tertiary biology units) that some extended and very-difficult formal study of biology is a big help in understanding the difference in complexity between life and non-life.
Life science research requires an understanding of the
physical mechanisms of life.