Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 13, 2014 at 9:05 pm
(May 13, 2014 at 8:28 pm)snowtracks Wrote: You can say what you want - but until YOU provide the actual scientific studies that support your statement - that have been published in a peer reviewed scientific journal - we have NO reason to accept ANYTHING you say - for your statement is unsupported - where evolution has millions of supporting documents. the late heavy bombardment was between 4.1 to 3.8 Ga. and life was teaming at 3.85 Ga. which means life arose instantaneously.
http://abstractsearch.agu.org/meetings/2...4A-07.html
[/quote]
Where do you get the figure 3.85? Life existed 2.7 Gya and possibly as early as 3.5 Gya. No 'instantaneous' creation required.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 30683
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 13, 2014 at 9:10 pm
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2014 at 9:11 pm by Jackalope.)
Quote:Quote:Quote:You can say what you want - but until YOU provide the actual scientific studies that support your statement - that have been published in a peer reviewed scientific journal - we have NO reason to accept ANYTHING you say - for your statement is unsupported - where evolution has millions of supporting documents.
the late heavy bombardment was between 4.1 to 3.8 Ga. and life was teaming at 3.85 Ga. which means life arose instantaneously.
http://abstractsearch.agu.org/meetings/2...4A-07.html
Where do you get the figure 3.85? Life existed 2.7 Gya and possibly as early as 3.5 Gya. No 'instantaneous' creation required.
Even if it were true, .05 Gy is 50 million years. Hardly instantaneous.
Posts: 948
Threads: 1
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 14, 2014 at 10:38 pm
(This post was last modified: May 14, 2014 at 10:39 pm by snowtracks.)
(May 13, 2014 at 9:05 pm)Chas Wrote: (May 13, 2014 at 8:28 pm)snowtracks Wrote: You can say what you want - but until YOU provide the actual scientific studies that support your statement - that have been published in a peer reviewed scientific journal - we have NO reason to accept ANYTHING you say - for your statement is unsupported - where evolution has millions of supporting documents. the late heavy bombardment was between 4.1 to 3.8 Ga. and life was teaming at 3.85 Ga. which means life arose instantaneously.
http://abstractsearch.agu.org/meetings/2...4A-07.html
Where do you get the figure 3.85? Life existed 2.7 Gya and possibly as early as 3.5 Gya. No 'instantaneous' creation required.
[/quote]
first sentence of link -
another link saying at least 3.7 - http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n1...o2025.html
(May 13, 2014 at 9:10 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Quote:Where do you get the figure 3.85? Life existed 2.7 Gya and possibly as early as 3.5 Gya. No 'instantaneous' creation required.
Even if it were true, .05 Gy is 50 million years. Hardly instantaneous. geologic instant
Atheist Credo: An universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Posts: 65
Threads: 14
Joined: December 10, 2013
Reputation:
1
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 14, 2014 at 10:49 pm
(This post was last modified: May 14, 2014 at 10:50 pm by Freedom of thought.)
(May 14, 2014 at 10:38 pm)snowtracks Wrote: (May 13, 2014 at 9:05 pm)Chas Wrote: the late heavy bombardment was between 4.1 to 3.8 Ga. and life was teaming at 3.85 Ga. which means life arose instantaneously.
http://abstractsearch.agu.org/meetings/2...4A-07.html
Where do you get the figure 3.85? Life existed 2.7 Gya and possibly as early as 3.5 Gya. No 'instantaneous' creation required. first sentence of link -
another link saying at least 3.7 - http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n1...o2025.html
(May 13, 2014 at 9:10 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Even if it were true, .05 Gy is 50 million years. Hardly instantaneous. geologic instant
[/quote]
Yes geological, biologically/chemically that's a really long time.
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 14, 2014 at 10:56 pm
Snowtracks is worse than genital herpes, because at least I can get a cream for that.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Posts: 30683
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 14, 2014 at 11:52 pm
(May 14, 2014 at 10:38 pm)snowtracks Wrote: (May 13, 2014 at 9:10 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Even if it were true, .05 Gy is 50 million years. Hardly instantaneous. geologic instant
When last I checked, biology was not a subset of geology.
Nice try at equivocation.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 15, 2014 at 10:38 pm
Didn't you know? All ologies are part of the same conspiracy.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 16, 2014 at 12:39 pm
(May 15, 2014 at 10:38 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Didn't you know? All ologies are part of the same conspiracy.
Except theology of course.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 948
Threads: 1
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
May 19, 2014 at 12:51 am
your guy doesn't like the odds: "The well-known evolutionist Francisco Ayala has recently made this argument quantitative. He estimates
that the probability of an intelligent species evolving on an Earthlike planet upon which one-cell organisms
have appeared is less than 10 to the minus one million power" but it's hard to tell what he believes. http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0058.pdf
but it's clear, that this atheist thing is rapidly losing ground. the militant atheist movement had it's day, and now is turning tail.
Atheist Credo: An universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Posts: 1946
Threads: 17
Joined: February 6, 2014
Reputation:
18
Abiogenesis is impossible
May 19, 2014 at 12:56 am
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2014 at 1:17 am by Rampant.A.I..)
That's funny, you must not have looked very hard:
Quote:Dr. Ayala, a former Dominican priest, said he told his audiences not just that evolution is a well-corroborated scientific theory, but also that belief in evolution does not rule out belief in God. In fact, he said, evolution “is more consistent with belief in a personal god than intelligent design. If God has designed organisms, he has a lot to account for.”
Consider, he said, that at least 20 percent of pregnancies are known to end in spontaneous abortion. If that results from divinely inspired anatomy, Dr. Ayala said, “God is the greatest abortionist of them all.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/scienc...ted=all&_r=
PS: your quote-mining is pathetic. No one believes you're actually reading journal articles, you got that from http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/06/dua...03729.html
And then searched for a link from a reputable source.
Unfortunately, the article you linked was written by this loon:
Quote:Frank Jennings Tipler (born February 1, 1947) is a mathematical physicist and cosmologist, holding a joint appointment in the Departments of Mathematics and Physics at Tulane University.[2] Tipler has authored books and papers on the Omega Point, which he claims is a mechanism for the resurrection of the dead. Some have argued that it is pseudoscience.[3] Tipler was a fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design, a society which advocated intelligent design.[4]
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler
Who has clear and obvious pseudo scien fit bias, and IS NOT A BIOLOGIST, he's a Christian apologist who it appears got into Cosmology to push his nutty agenda, known for such publications as The Physics of Immortality, The Physics of Christianity
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B003D7JZC6...ot_redir=1
Quote:A highly respected physicist demonstrates that the essential beliefs of Christianity are wholly consistent with the laws of physics.
Frank Tipler takes an exciting new approach to the age-old dispute about the relationship between science and religion in The Physics of Christianity. In reviewing centuries of writings and discussions, Tipler realized that in all the debate about science versus religion, there was no serious scientific research into central Christian claims and beliefs. So Tipler embarked on just such a scientific inquiry. The Physics of Christianity presents the fascinating results of his pioneering study.
This is akin to bringing Buzz Aldrin on an episode of Ancient Aliens to discuss his personal brand of nuttery.
|
