The origins of abiotic species

[noguru]

The experiment is evidence of design.

No. The preparation of the experiment is designed. But the same could be said about any research, because experiments are designed by humans to investigate the natural world. So your objection is illogical. Go find another thread to spread you willful ignorance, please. I implore you.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

:rotfl:

Yeah, its hilarious. Yes I did say "read and comment". How do your comments relate at all to the subject matter of the thread?



Science is about investigating the natural world. It is rather simple. Though confused sophists like you do tend to get all caught up on the complexities of the world.



Empirical evidence supports evolution. I am not using this thread to do that. There is a vast amount of scientific literature that does that.

This thread is about how life seems to be the likely result of processes in the natural world. I know this might be confusing to you. But there is a nuanced difference here. I do not expect all people to get it. And those that don't get it should keep their mouths shut and listen. Unless they have a pertinent question about the subject.

"It is better to be silent and appear to be a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

If you think your insults will somehow prove your intelligence; they don't. Neither do your claims of intelligence prove it. Nor does thinking that a controlled experiment that gets molecules to come together gives any knowledge besides molecules coming together. It proves nothing else.

Evolution is far from knowledge.

 

[noguru]

If you think your insults will somehow prove your intelligence; they don't. Neither do your claims of intelligence prove it. Nor does thinking that a controlled experiment that gets molecules to come together gives any knowledge besides molecules coming together.

I see no insults. Just the truth. You can call it whatever you want, but the problem is yours, not science's.

 

[noguru]

It proves nothing else.

Evolution is far from knowledge.

You are clueless, that is why you post such nonsense.

1.) This thread is not here to prove anything. Science compiles evidence that indicates a specific conclusion. If you have a better conclusion based on the evidence here, I would love to hear it.

2.) One more time, this thread is not about evolution. Get with it, or get lost, you complete moron (stop spamming up this thread, please). And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

 

[noguru]

Duplicate.

 

[Hedshaker]

Elements? Where did they come from? The Higgs boson, where did it come from?

Why stop the questions there? If you believe an intelligent designer/creator is responsible..... then where did that come from?

No mystery is solved by asserting and even greater mystery.

 

[6days]

If you believe an intelligent designer/creator is responsible..... then where did that come from?.

Evidence is that everything which begins to exist has a cause.
So the evidence is that something must have existed uncaused throughout eternity. The evidence is that the uncaused cause is an intelligent omniscient creator.

 

[Stripe]

No mystery is solved by asserting and even greater mystery.

1. We do not assert God; He has declared Himself.
2. You certainly can solve a mystery through the explanative power of something even more mysterious. Why would you say otherwise?

 

[gcthomas]

Evidence is that everything which begins to exist has a cause.
So the evidence is that something must have existed uncaused throughout eternity. The evidence is that the uncaused cause is an intelligent omniscient creator.

Why do you reject the idea that the universe itself is eternal (as in the current favoured cosmological theory 'eternal chaotic inflation)?

Once you accept the possibility of eternal entities existing without cause, why cannot that be the universe itself?

 

[gcthomas]

1. We do not assert God; He has declared Himself.

You assert that a God has declared itself. Typical theist.

 

[Hedshaker]

Evidence is that everything which begins to exist has a cause.
So the evidence is that something must have existed uncaused throughout eternity. The evidence is that the uncaused cause is an intelligent omniscient creator.

Your cherished beliefs do not constitute evidence. Trying to Talk a God into existence is not evidence. You can't even prove it exists let alone show it to be un-caused.


So unless you can explain where it came from there's no point claiming it created the universe.

 

[Hedshaker]

1. We do not assert God; He has declared Himself.

Assertion without evidence, dimissed without evidence.

2. You certainly can solve a mystery through the explanetive power of something even more mysterious. Why would you say otherwise?

Since when has Goddidit ever explained anything? :idunno:

 

[iouae]

Read this and comment.

If you choose to, of course. It is not an order, just thought I'd give you folks another shot. Can you reach for the stars on this one and give some intelligent/thoughtful responses?

Not trying to be nasty, but this is exciting as Timmy adding vinegar to bicarb in a clay volcano and claiming he has made a "volcano". Very nice Timmy.

After evolution/God had finished with all experimenting, evolution/God settled on the only form of life known to exist which is life as we see it today.

Show me steps towards real life and that will impress.

 

[6days]

After evolution/God had finished with all experimenting, evolution/God settled on the only form of life known to exist which is life as we see it today.

You seem to have a impotent god. You missed this thread created in your honor.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115578

 

[Stripe]

Since when has Goddidit ever explained anything? :idunno:

When God did it. :up:

 

[iouae]

You seem to have a impotent god. You missed this thread created in your honor.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115578

You believe in a God who knows it all, thus cannot learn.

But it is completely off the point I was making that all life follows the same pattern, viz. the basic unit is the cell.
Anything which can tell us how this cell life came into being would be useful in explaining life.
And DNA, RNA universally stores genetic info. We need theories how that could evolve.

 

[Hedshaker]

When God did it. :up:

Lol, Homer Simpson logic.

Or maybe that's a bit harsh on Homer. :think:

 

[Stripe]

Lol, Homer Simpson logic. Or maybe that's a bit harsh on Homer. :think:

Actually, it was the only sensible answer to your question.

When is X an explanation? When X is the reason.

Perfectly logical. :up:

 

[noguru]

Not trying to be nasty, but this is exciting as Timmy adding vinegar to bicarb in a clay volcano and claiming he has made a "volcano". Very nice Timmy.

After evolution/God had finished with all experimenting, evolution/God settled on the only form of life known to exist which is life as we see it today.

Show me steps towards real life and that will impress.

I posted another article after that also. I plan to cover the evidence (all of it) thoroughly. Excuse if this sounds rude, but I'm not in the least bit concerned about what does not or what does impress you.

 

[6days]

Actually, it was the only sensible answer to your question.

It was perfectly logical!