You wrote…

However, endosymbiosis and symbiogenesis do not contradict ID, nor front-loaded evolution. In fact, they may offer a way to understand how a designer would have proceeded. This was certainly the view of Fred Hoyle, as I noted here:

http://telicthoughts.com/fred-...

But I don't want this thread to be about whether front-loaded evolution is a good or bad idea. I would just like to find out why there seems to be a feud brewing between evo-devo and endosymbiogenesis/symbiogenesis.

I sympathize with your frustration with the us-verses-them mentality.

I had brought up Margulis's ideas as a third choice alternative between God and randomness presumptions in previous comments but no one was interested then either. It appears too many people are focused on circling the wagons around their positions.

I believe there is validity in the charge of dogmatic Group Think among the defenders of the MET status quo. What gets me in trouble with many ID proponents is that I'm equally convinced that dogmatic Group Think prevades the ID Movement.

At any rate, I would agree that the lack of reception for Margulis' ideas is supporting evidence of resistance against what is considered dangerous ideas.

I believe Pez found a quote from Margulis where she felt she was forced to claim being a "Darwinist" under peer pressure (while pointing out she opposed neo-darwinists).

I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help. Hopefully this was close to what you were looking for.

But I don't want this thread to be about whether front-loaded evolution is a good or bad idea. I would just like to find out why there seems to be a feud brewing between evo-devo and endosymbiogenesis/symbiogenesis.

Thanks to everyone for not clearing this up.

Well, Bradford, if you have nothing of substance to say and refuse to answer any of my questions,

Cells come from other cells is the only definitively factual statement in the exchange. I'm not going to discuss evidence for your theory that you refuse to introduce yourself but if you want to then bring it on.

Give us a fair review of the scientific evidence and let's discuss that. Or alternatively, give us your hypotheses and let's discuss them.

Abio is your baby not mine. AFAIK it's a frackin story.

What I offer is honesty- cells come from other cells and extracellular biomolecules do not form the biomolecular systems characteristic of cells. Abiogenesis merits no respect. Stop putting it on a pedastol.

That's honesty? Summarizing research as

Generate a few random biomolecules and call that an explanation.

That's supposed to merit respect?

Give us a fair review of the scientific evidence and let's discuss that. Or alternatively, give us your hypotheses and let's discuss them.

Let's face it Bradford, you have nothing to offer but empty rhetoric and dishonest distortions of the real scientific efforts to investigate the origin of life. It's pathetic.

What I offer is honesty- cells come from other cells and extracellular biomolecules do not form the biomolecular systems characteristic of cells. Abiogenesis merits no respect. Stop putting it on a pedastol.

That's nothing to brag about. It's being tested in labs. Wow. Generate a few random biomolecules and call that an explanation. Abiodunnit.

Yes, that's why I didn't brag about it. But you denigrate it without argument. Do you think "generate a few random biomolecules" is a fair summary of the research that is done? If so, why? Please let us hear your alternative hypotheses that can be tested in labs.

Let's face it Bradford, you have nothing to offer but empty rhetoric and dishonest distortions of the real scientific efforts to investigate the origin of life. It's pathetic.

There is a "material" explanation for life. So far it's a patchwork of hypotheses, far from a complete theory, but they are positive hypotheses that are being investigated in labs.

That's nothing to brag about. It's being tested in labs. Wow. Generate a few random biomolecules and call that an explanation. Abiodunnit.

Even without cells, there can be variation, heredity and selection.

You repeating this does not make it factual. What does natural selection yield in an extracellular environment?