(August 12, 2017 at 7:35 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 7:01 pm)Cyberman Wrote: Personally, I'm no more an evolutionist than I am a gravitationalist, or a thermodynamicist.

Accepting science does not need the suffix "ist" after it because it is not club or political ideology or a religion or economic view. Adding "ist" to those words would be like adding "ist" to make "gravityist".

Pretty sure that was sort of my point, actually.

(August 12, 2017 at 7:36 pm)Succubus Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 10:02 am)rjh4 is back Wrote: I have a syllogism for you.

1) If the atheists other than Brian who have participated in  this thread think that rjh4 is wrong on an argument, they will address rjh4's argument.

2) The atheists other than Brian who have participated in this thread have not addressed rjh4's argument that Brian is full of BS when he said: "Close proximity of individual atoms that by themselves are not a living thing, but because they bond like magnets exchanging electrons, that makes it very easy to go from non life to life."

3) Therefore, the atheists other than Brian who have participated in this thread think rjh4 is right in his argument that Brian is full of BS when he said: "Close proximity of individual atoms that by themselves are not a living thing, but because they bond like magnets exchanging electrons, that makes it very easy to go from non life to life."

What do you think?  Is it valid and sound?

You're referring to yourself in the third person?

So what our resident moron is saying is that not even heat, say when you cook on a stove wont make the atoms and molecules change chemical structure because they as individual atoms and molecules are billions of light years apart.

(August 12, 2017 at 5:50 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Thing is, it's not unproven or even remotely controversial.  Organic chemistry facilitates life because of the number and complexity of bonds it's capable of expressing.

He didn't say organic chemistry facilitates life. If that is what he said, I would not have objected.

---

(August 12, 2017 at 5:52 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Of course Brian's claim -- mine as well, for that matter -- is yet unproven. It may never be proven.

I'm comfortable admitting ignorance, and I find that preferable to claiming knowledge I do not and perhaps cannot possess.

Thanks for saying so. I, also have no problem admitting ignorance. The older I get the more I realize I don't know.

(August 12, 2017 at 5:25 pm)rjh4 is back Wrote: I even tried to see if others agreed with him but got silence. I was not terribly surprised by Brian's reluctance. I am, however, surprised that the atheists let Brian's statement go without comment.

Oh, well. Such is life.

Did you miss this:

Quote:Well if he said that; he's a very silly boy.

https://atheistforums.org/thread-49311-p...pid1601255

(August 12, 2017 at 8:13 pm)Succubus Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 5:25 pm)rjh4 is back Wrote: I even tried to see if others agreed with him but got silence. I was not terribly surprised by Brian's reluctance. I am, however, surprised that the atheists let Brian's statement go without comment.

Oh, well. Such is life.

Did you miss this:

Quote:Well if he said that; he's a very silly boy.

https://atheistforums.org/thread-49311-p...pid1601255

I did! My apologies to you, Succubus.

(August 12, 2017 at 7:43 pm)Cyberman Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 7:35 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Accepting science does not need the suffix "ist" after it because it is not club or political ideology or a religion or economic view. Adding "ist" to those words would be like adding "ist" to make "gravityist".

Pretty sure that was sort of my point, actually.

I was commenting, I agree. It wasn't aimed at you, but adding to what you said.

---

(August 12, 2017 at 7:55 pm)rjh4 is back Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 5:50 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Thing is, it's not unproven or even remotely controversial.  Organic chemistry facilitates life because of the number and complexity of bonds it's capable of expressing.

He didn't say organic chemistry facilitates life. If that is what he said, I would not have objected.

---

(August 12, 2017 at 5:52 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Of course Brian's claim -- mine as well, for that matter -- is yet unproven. It may never be proven.

I'm comfortable admitting ignorance, and I find that preferable to claiming knowledge I do not and perhaps cannot possess.

Thanks for saying so. I, also have no problem admitting ignorance. The older I get the more I realize I don't know.

Said the creationist who is certain the Christian God of the bible did it, while ignoring Allah and Yahweh and Vishnu and Buddha.

(August 12, 2017 at 7:55 pm)rjh4 is back Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 5:50 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Thing is, it's not unproven or even remotely controversial.  Organic chemistry facilitates life because of the number and complexity of bonds it's capable of expressing.

He didn't say organic chemistry facilitates life. If that is what he said, I would not have objected.

He explained -why- organic chemistry facilitates life...and yet you -did- object.......................?

(August 11, 2017 at 8:56 pm)Godscreated Wrote:

(August 11, 2017 at 3:41 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Just trying to sort it out.

So people are ganging up but they are not persecuting you.

You seem very conflicted and confused. You need FSM in your life.

Have a blessed day.

RAmen

  Being oppressed and/or persecuted is far more than could ever come from this site, the rules see to that. I don't see the rules changing so those things could happen, be bad rep for this site and it's atheist. By the way I'm in no way confused either.

GC

I disagree, That last sentence was a garbled mess.

(August 12, 2017 at 7:55 pm)rjh4 is back Wrote:

(August 12, 2017 at 5:52 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Of course Brian's claim -- mine as well, for that matter -- is yet unproven. It may never be proven.

I'm comfortable admitting ignorance, and I find that preferable to claiming knowledge I do not and perhaps cannot possess.

Thanks for saying so. I, also have no problem admitting ignorance. The older I get the more I realize I don't know.

It's a shame you seem to focus your questions only upon views you don't agree with. Ignorance, like intelligence, is an internal state of affairs. You strike me as someone who hasn't devoted this sort of questioning to your own beliefs.

Tell us what you know about your god. Not what you believe, not what you think you've experienced, but what we can look at with our own eyes and say, "yeah, he might be making a little sense here." Can you do that?

I doubt it ... but if you've got objective support for your god hypothesis like the abiogenesis hypotheses have support (in terms of autocatalytic reactions being observed, in terms of RNA evolution being observed), feel free to share it.

Until then, your questions, pointed as they are, seem very defensive, rather than pointed at expanding knowledge. "We don't know how life started, therefore my god started it" is not very convincing. I'd suggest you start by building your own case. And if you have no case, then at the very worst your hypothesis is no better than those you rail against, and from my own perspective much worse.

Give me evidence. Change my mind.

(August 12, 2017 at 9:25 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote:

(August 11, 2017 at 8:56 pm)Godscreated Wrote:   Being oppressed and/or persecuted is far more than could ever come from this site, the rules see to that. I don't see the rules changing so those things could happen, be bad rep for this site and it's atheist. By the way I'm in no way confused either.

GC

I disagree, That last sentence was a garbled mess.

 To bad you have trouble understanding plane English. You mean you think AF is going to change the rules so you can oppress the Christians that venture to this site. 

GC