What Do Evolutionists Really Believe?

JBsptfn has cited more propaganda from his chief source of pseudo-scientific bullshit, Pogge, who runs the creationist site Science Against Evolution.  The article he cited was written by Pogge in response to a commenter some years ago, who noted his poor grasp of scientific facts.  It attempts to dispel the notion of abiogenesis by providing a distorted view of scientific thinking on the topic and complaining that they teach this stuff in schools.  And where does Poggie get his information about what they teach in biology class?  From CliffsNotes, of course.

But, in the interest in fairness, we will quote the foremost authority on Biology (and English literature, too) most widely read by high school and college students in America. No matter what textbook is used in class, you can be sure that what the students really read is Cliffs Notes! - Pogge

The synopsis for this CliffNotes educational resource describes it as:

what you'd expect-—and want—from CliffsNotes: a no-nonsense quick review of biology that high school and Biology 101 students can use to review biology. - Cliffs Quick Review Biology Synopses & Reviews

Obviously, Pogge never took biology himself.

But he has armed himself with sufficient knowledge of biological science from creationist websites and CliffsNotes to convince himself that he's in a position to refute anything those "evolutionists" have to say.  I don't know about Pogge, but when I was in school, I actually studied science.  I didn't try to skate by without reading and learning the material.  Pogge's level of scientific knowledge is indicative of his CliffsNotes understanding of the topics he writes about.  I have previously discussed Pogge and his abysmal scientific knowledge.  I feel it is appropriate to advise people like JBsptfn that Science against Evolution is not a reliable, or even a reasonable source of scientific information.

With that in mind, let's address the issue that JBsptfn raises.

If science can live with a designer, then why did scientists try to conduct an experiment in 1953 to try to show that life can form spontaneously by accident? - JBsptfn

He is referring to Miller and Urey's famous "primordial soup" experiment that was mentioned in Pogge's quotes from CliffsNotes.  In a related article, Pogge falsely claimed that this experiment failed in its purpose to demonstrate the origins of life on earth, and that it has been discredited because the simulated environment was not sufficiently like what would have existed at that time.  Neither of those claims are true, as explained here.  Its purpose was to demonstrate that the organic compounds that are the building blocks of life could be created, and claims about the unsuitability of the simulated environment have been debunked.

But JBsptfn, who gets his extremely poor knowledge of science from Pogge, thinks he has proof that atheist scientists are engaged in a futile effort to prove that life arose from non-life, and this is due to scientists' dogmatic adherence to materialism, which they cling to despite all the evidence that supposedly proves them wrong, according to Pogge.

In answer to JBsptfn's question, let me say that science doesn't need an ideology like the creationists do.  The comment he was replying to, made by Papalinton, was to note that even if materialism is shown to be false, the scientific community would take this information into account and devise new theories that are consistent with the known facts.  Religion, on the other hand has no allegiance to facts.  If materialism were proven to be true, the creationists would not abandon their religious theories.  Their theories are not based on facts or evidence in the first place.  That's the difference between science and ideologically driven pseudo-science.

Science is a process of evaluating the evidence and possible explanations, and reasoning to the best hypothesis.  But that hypothesis must stand up to testing.  If it can't, then a different one must be considered.  Pogge wants us to believe that this experiment was a failure, because he can't accept the hypothesis, due to his own ideology.  But his creationist theory has never stood up to any testing, and it will never be tested, because it is untestable.  And for that reason, it isn't science.

While it remains true that scientists have yet to produce a life form in the laboratory, this is just a matter of time.  Despite all Pogge's propaganda, they have been making considerable progress since 1953.  Sean Carroll provides an outline of the current theory of abiogenesis that is readable and easy to understand, in his book The Big Picture: On the Origins of Life, Meaning, and the Universe Itself.  Well worth reading.