ARCHIVE: Need some expert eyes here

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Correct gentlemen!
Though at first I thought it was a trick and wondered how he would make the room that hot (sprinklers would go off at 180).
Then he rolled in the vacum chamber, oh such fun we had.
But this illustrates something.
I knew what conditions water boiled under, and what conditions it didn't boil under.
It was what I didn't know that bite me.
 

zoo22

Well-known member
fool said:
Correct gentlemen!
Though at first I thought it was a trick and wondered how he would make the room that hot (sprinklers would go off at 180).
Then he rolled in the vacum chamber, oh such fun we had.
But this illustrates something.
I knew what conditions water boiled under, and what conditions it didn't boil under.
It was what I didn't know that bite me.

:)

I've been reading up on science now that I've gotten involved in this whole creating life in a peanut butter jar experiment.

I believe I'm making some headway, but honestly, it's hard to tell. I *think* I just saw the peanut butter jar give a little jiggle. It may have been life, though I'll admit it was possibly shaking from a truck driving by. I might have to give it a day or two ... Could it possibly take that long!?

Could PB life be dangerous? Should I get a cage ready or something?

Also, a slightly more touchy question: if I do create life in a peanut butter jar, how will I know it's chemical/biological formed and that God didn't put it in the jar? They didn't mention that in the video. Frankly, I've come to think that I'm not going to be able to actually prove much with this experiment that will cut down on the TOL evolution debates.

And yeah, water in a vacuum chamber will also eventually freeze at room temperature.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
SUTG said:
Great. Good luck finding it.
It's funny how an threads like these its the creationist that appeals to tested and known science while all the atheists splash around in the unknown and untested hoping against hope that their WAG will someday fill their gap.
 

SUTG

New member
Knight said:
It's funny how an threads like these its the creationist that appeals to tested and known science while all the atheists splash around in the unknown and untested hoping against hope that their WAG will someday fill their gap.

spontaneous generation != abiogenesis != evolution

You still haven't provided an experiment showing that life cannot come from non life, and you can't.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
SUTG said:
You still haven't provided an experiment showing that life cannot come from non life, and you can't.
And you have faith that life DOES come from non-living matter.... I am happy for you! Good luck with that.

YES or NO.... do you believe in spontaneous generation? And why?
 

Johnny

New member
Knight,

Is inductive reasoning sound logic? Yes or No.

Can God violate sound logic? Yes or No.

Is the argument that "Life only comes from life" based on inductive reasoning? Yes or No.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Johnny said:
Knight,

Is inductive reasoning sound logic? Yes or No.

Can God violate sound logic? Yes or No.

Is the argument that "Life only comes from life" based on inductive reasoning? Yes or No.
Johnny, its OK to admit you believe in spontaneous generation.
 

Johnny

New member
Knight said:
Johnny, its OK to admit you believe in spontaneous generation.
Ah, I see Knight won't play unless he can win. All fine and well with me, I just wanted people to see you directly dodge the questions instead of just ignoring me.

That being said, I do not believe in "spontaneous generation", the concept that Pasteur was interested in. That's because "spontaneous generation" and "abiogenesis" are very different ideas -- even despite the fact that you have continuously confused the two throughout this thread. Take a look at wikipedia or search the internet. There are a variety of resources available to help you understand the difference.
 

Vision in Verse

New member
Johnny said:
Ah, I see Knight won't play unless he can win. All fine and well with me, I just wanted people to see you directly dodge the questions instead of just ignoring me.

That being said, I do not believe in "spontaneous generation", the concept that Pasteur was interested in. That's because "spontaneous generation" and "abiogenesis" are very different ideas -- even despite the fact that you have continuously confused the two throughout this thread. Take a look at wikipedia or search the internet. There are a variety of resources available to help you understand the difference.
Don't worry man, anyone with eyes can see he is dodging and manipulating questions.
 

Woodbine

New member
Knight said:
It's funny how an threads like these its the creationist that appeals to tested and known science while all the atheists splash around in the unknown and untested hoping against hope that their WAG will someday fill their gap.
I think your idea of what science is is way of the mark. The scientific method is incapable of proving anything. Proof is a logical concept, not a scientific one. So your claim that science has proven abiogenesis to be impossible is wrong at the most fundamental level.

Also, what is WAG?
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Wiki means fast in Hawiian.
Chosen by a software guy as the name for his user editable system that drives things like Wikipedia.
 

SUTG

New member
Knight said:
And you have faith that life DOES come from non-living matter....

No, but I have faith that you can't provide any scientific results showing that life coming from non-living matter is impossible.

YES or NO.... do you believe in spontaneous generation? And why?

No, because I know too much about Biology.

Do you believe that sheep can only come from sheep? After all, as creationists are so fond of pointing out, that is all anyone has ever seen.
 
Top