Roll call: If you're a primitive replicator, please raise your hand...
Offline So, it happened at work.
I'm sitting and eating some chicken, drinking some iced tea. The Simpsons are on, and I just finished 'reading' the 'AAAAAAA' article in Uncyclopedia, so I'm not exactly on my guard (...and, did I mention I was at work? Eating lunch and watching TV? Why the fuck should I have to be 'on my guard' here?).
These two middle-aged co-workers, one of them a muslim, are having an argument and bring it over to my table, but I'm not paying much attention to it. But then the increasing volume starts making me a tad uncomfortable, so I interrupt politely ask if they could move their conversation to one of the empty table (there's only the three of us in the room, and there are two other completely empty tables. I thought it was a pretty reasonable request).
Apparently, this is exactly the question that begs the door be opened for invitation into their debate.
Non-Muslim, apparently Christian co-worker: ...Well, hey - this young man believes our Lord and Savior was Jesus Christ. Right?
Now, what I guess I should've done is sit there. Pretend that I had suddenly become too stupid to speak. Or maybe pretend I suddenly needed to go to the washroom. Because. hey - I guess that's just how things are in the modern workplace.
If course, me being the uninformed dupe I am, I actually decided to politely reply.
Me: Oh. Well, no, I don't, to be honest.
Then the muslim suddenly becomes almost frighteningly excited.
Muslim: See! See! Not every Canadian here subscribed to your Holy Bible. You believe in the divinity of the Prophet Mohammed, child?
Me: Uh. No, I don't.
Muslim: Ho, ho! So, then - who's your false savior?
...Now, I know these waters. And they're rough sailing. So, I tired to just laugh it off.
Me: Two for One pizza. *laughs*
They didn't laugh back. And you know exactly how much more awkward it feels when you're the only one going down that road.
Both of them, almost in perfect unison: ...What's that supposed to mean?
Me: ...Well, I just joking; two for one pizza is my 'savior' in that it's affordable take-out for my lazy butt. As for as belief goes, I'm an atheist. Gnostic athiest.
I slid it in there as casually as I could, but both of those women looked at me like I'd just uttered an obscenity. The muslim wet from an 'almost frightening' attitude to 'actually frightening' nearly instantly.
Me: ...Oh-kay, look, I'm not into these kind of discussions and arguments--
Then the christian women interrupts.
Her: No doubt...
...and starts filling me in on how foolish anyone is who doesn't believe in an intelligent creator, giving me the tornado-assembling-aircraft-from-junkyard analogy (because I haven't already heard that one a few hundred times).
Me: Well, actually, the self-replicators that would've been the first signs of life on Earth would've been much simpler then cells--
Her: Oh? And what were these 'self replicators'?
Me: Well, they'd have been... Now, if I recall my science correctly, they were just molecules, essentially.
Her: And where did they magically disappear?
Then I started to get a bit fed-up with her condescending tone, and - to be honest - flustered, because, well, I just couldn't answer these kind of questions very well.
Me: ...I'm not a fucking biologist, archaeologist or, well, much of a scientist at all. So, I don't know.
Her: Oh? How about that? So you don't know about it, but you just believe in it anyway? Not at that concerned about where you'll end up then, eh?
Muslim: *finally seems to lighten-up a bit, giving this smarmy smile and nodding*
Me: Well - do you have, or know of, any compelling evidence for God's existence?
...So, and perhaps I asked for this one - she puts a fucking copy of the King James Holy Bible on the table, and slides it towards me.
Me: I'll take that as a 'no'. So, I'm just going back to the phones.
I was going to argue about how fallacious it was to say that since I wasn't an expert in science I didn't 'believe' in it, so I may as convert to Christianity on the spot - but I didn't want to be part of that ugly discussion.
The best part? I find out at the end of my shift tonight that the muslim women, who looked at me like I'd have looked at a serial rapist, is the damn assistant manager for my workplace, as well as the person personally assigned to my schedule preferences and performance reviews.
FUCKING AWESOME!
So, anyway - I want to salvage what I can from this. I think I could best start by getting my layman knowledge up to speed:
The theorized first replicators, what were they? Amino acid molecules? Are they still kicking around and multiplying as we speak, or are they a thing of the past?
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
- Login to post comments
It's still not known for sure (there are several ways biogenesis could have happened, and none of them are incompatible with the notion of replicators. Basically life came from non-living, replicating systems or patters. Closest analogies today might be liquid crystals or fire. Basically, a series of a few "mutations" introduced heritability to these replicating systems. This was before DNA. DNA probably evolved from RNA, which evolved from PNA. As for the exact structure of the first replicators, that it is debated, but chemical evolution certainly produced them.
“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”
Thank-you. Now I don't feel quite so stupid.
I can't help with your science question,but I just want to say well done for managing to defend atheism even after you were put on the spot like that.
That woman is the epitome of irony.."Oh? How about that? So you don't know about it, but you just believe in it anyway?" um..what does she suppose religion does..hope you have better luck with irrational people in the future
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
Abiogenesis started out with amino acids, right? DeludedGod, could you assist us in this matter with some of your expertise, please?
Kevin, good story man. I can picture myself being stuck in the same situation. Classic. I wish I could have been there with you.
Good luck at work.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
No. Not necessarily. The problem is that Abiogenesis isn't just a single reaction between nonliving things to form life. It's more properly the evolution of organic life from nonliving replicators, and there are many, many theories (some, but not all of them being mutually exclusive) as to what these first replicators were: lipids? protocells? spontaneously formed RNA molecules? Autocatalysts? Bubbles of rare gasses? Proteins? Ampiphiles forming in seawater? The list goes on. I'm not even familiar with half of the theories out there on what exactly these first replicators were, but it's my understanding that under the right conditions, abiotic molecules can "behave" like living systems with self-organization and replication. The crucial difference here, as John Maynard Smith pointed out, is that replication does not imply heritability (of variation). Even in asexual organisms, mistakes occur in transcription which pass on mutations to offspring. It's heritability that is the missing part of the evolutionary algorithm here.
“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”
Hey Kevin..
First, that sucks that you had to get involved in that conversation.
Second, everytime something about abiogenesis comes up, I always think "man, I have got to read up on that." I'm studying biology in school, but a complete comprehensive study on the subject has never been part of my curriculum thus far.
I don't have very much specific info, and as FulltimeDefendent said, there is no one theory that we've been able to label as correct. However, someone (damn, can't remember who it was) posted that article called "Did Life Evolve in Ice?" a few weeks back. It was interesting, and provided some basic info about the subject.
If the topic ever comes up again, I would tell the religious people that while we haven't completely figured out the process, we know that self-replicating molecules (like RNAs) are in existence, and that it is not unreasonable to think that these could randomly form over the course of several billion years. Molecules are unbonding and rebonding and exchangng electrons hundreds of times per second... allow that to happen for a billion years, and you could come up with all sorts of molecular compounds - especially in the context of the "ice evolution" article, which hypothesizes that these reactions took place between atoms trapped in bubbles or pockets in the ice. And, as has been reiterated on this website time and time again, just because we don't know the exact mechanism of the formation of life does not mean we must say "goddidit" by default. Science has come up with a number of answers thus far, and none of them involve a god.
On a side note, your work environment sound interesting, as I had always thought it was impolite to question or scrutinize the religious beliefs of others in the workplace. Especially since the one woman was your assistant manager, make sure that you don't become a victim of discrimination in the workplace.
And Kevin-
if you do become a victim of discrimination over this, there are people who will fight for you relentlessly.
“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”
First - thanks for the info. Plenty of seeds for me to read on.
...Unless you're a YET, and believe that the Earth can't possibly be over 6,000 years old. Now, I don't know for sure that she was - but given the stupefyingly enormous YET movement in Alberta's capital, I don't care to open that can of worms.
*Sigh*
It is impolite. Or so goes my own thought on the matter, anyway. The workplace itself is extremely typical, as far as brain dead jobs one does while working on their own stuff on the side: we're a call centre for a pizza joint. Not exactly a breeding chamber for heated political or theological discourse.
Yet, there I fucking was.
As far as discrimination in the workplace, behold - the convoluted clusterfuck that is the 'Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission':
http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/complaints/quick_facts_complaint_resolution.asp
So, essentially, let's say the assistant manager does something simple and ignorant like decided to change my schedule to be all split shifts. I call her on the bullshit (since I specifically requested no split shifts, and was hired under the pretense I wouldn't work any) and contact the AHRCC.
First, I've got to wait until the complaint is processed. Then I wait for the 'completely objective' conciliator to be assigned to the complaint. Then the ass. manager and I meet with said conciliator, and proceed with Conciliation - a bullshit compromise on terms that were unfairly imparted on me. Note the lack of any actual governing rules in this process; it's completely up to the fiat of the conciliator. If the ass. manager agrees to, say, cut back half of the unfair shifts, the conciliator feels that this is reasonable, that's that. I could argue and try to eat away even more of my life to get the complaint to a panel, but given the scale of the issue, it's likely that the complaint would just be dismissed at that point.
'Don't worry, citizens! Here in Alberta, you can only be partially discriminated against whilst at work!'
Now, to be fair, it could be that I'm angry over nothing. Hopefully the ass. manager will be sensible when it comes to performance reviews and shifts (and a good portion of the review isn't up to here, anyway - it's based on metrics); and, in the grand scheme, my work schedule isn't a monumentally huge issue.
But, give me a fucking break. I'm just plain exhausted with the notion that, yes, even today, I can't 'be an atheist' without it carrying a load of baggage and fielding demands to justify my position.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
For perspective's sakes, here's a snapshot of dealing with religion from a manager's viewpoint.
At last count, I manage 6 practising Moslems, 2 Scientologists, 1 Zen Buddhist, 1 evangelical-type Christian, several non-practising Catholics and 1 atheist.
During Ramadan, I have to make certain allowances for my Moslem staff, amending break schedules to fit prayer times and the irritability factor is a significant one. Staff who can't eat, drink or have a smoke from sunrise to sunset get really shitty come 3pm, and accusations of gross misconduct during that period have to be tempered with the fact that at least one of the protagonists will have rather low blood sugar.
Because I make those allowances during Ramadan, I have to make other allowances for staff of other faiths. No manager in the world likes to sign off vacation time with a notice period of a matter of hours. It really fucks things up and I am a bastard about it when I need to be, but when someone puts in a vacation request like that for religious reasons, I am obliged to sign it off or risk an accusation of discrimination. SNAFU.
I really hope that your assistant manager is capable of judging your performance and working out your shift pattern without negative bias.
Stop that... It's silly.
...And we still get the, "...Oh, but why can't you just leave us be with our delusions of grandeur?"
Talk about a waste of time, energy and resources.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Abiogenesis has several different competing theories at the moment, the most compelling IMO is the RNA first hypothesis. It goes something like this.
RNA unlike DNA is a single strand nucleic acid which means it can replicate without a catalyst. Short strands of RNA could be formed from amino acids which are created naturally in many places in the solar system, Saturn's moon Enceledus, Mars, and Jupiter's moon Europa. Amino acids would have been created naturally in the early Earths atmosphere by lighting and condensed in the early ocean and lakes. Cell membranes could have been formed by proteinoids which can be formed either in heated water with a certain concentration of amino acids, or from clay substrates. One you have RNA and a primitive cell wall you have whats called a hypercycle a very primitive cell. From there you run evolution a few billion years and you have complicated single celled life.
TL:DR - simple explanation - Amino acids formed in the atmosphere though lighting, in water and in the ground though chemistry, amino acids form RNA more amino acids form cell walls, bang first cell.
Studio7manga.com
Oh, I wouldn't worry about your job. Now your religious co-workers will want to be as nice to you as possible, to prove who has the better Invisible Superdad. Make it look like you're actually considering their arguments every once and a while to keep them believing they're winning, and you'll own the place.
And that, children, is why religion is dangerous.
As for the actual scientific argument, they probably wouldn't want to exert the effort involved in learning. I'm going to go out on a limb and say they replace everything that's "I don't know" with "God". For instance, "I don't know where my car keys are," means God has them.
If you're actually interested, though, this is incredibly cool:
http://www.physorg.com/news123440279.html
Also helpful in taking out the "earth is so perfect" argument is more and more discoveries that our solar system isn't all that unique after all:
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/16736/1066/
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
You don't really have to justify anything. "What does this have to do with work?" is a legit question. Your "I'll just go back to the phones" is the only thing your workplace can ask of you. Even if you said, "I believe that unicorns were the common ancestor to all life on the planet," you still sound more coherent than "This one time, a creator made the earth, and now he listens to my prayers."
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence