(May 13, 2018 at 10:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 13, 2018 at 11:19 am)Tizheruk Wrote: Huggy does realize that Abiogenesis isn't atheism ? And no Huggy your ignorance of biochemistry does not mean there is no evidence of Abiogenesis. And even if it was an absurd view it does not make your view any less a proposition of magic .So once again your attempted appeal to hypocrisy and lame virtue point scoring fails . Someone else's bad idea's doesn't validate yours .

I'm not speaking to Atheism, I'm speaking to the OP and 99% of the atheists on this forum who accept abiogenesis as a plausible explanation of how life began.

Biochemistry has nothing to do with abiogenesis, since it posits that life arose from non-life, so if anyone of you believe there is proof that life arose from non-life, present it.

Well if you imagine a line with simple elements on left side end and life as we know it on the right.  You'll find compound elements next from the left then progressively more complex molecules leading toward the center.  Before you get very far at all toward the middle you'll come across methane CH4, considered the simplest organic molecule with just one carbon atom with four of hydrogen.  Most molecules that include carbon are organic building blocks.  (Remember we are called carbon based lifeforms for a reason.)  Prions might be considered just left of the midpoint while viruses are just right.  

Just what counts as biochemistry when simple methane is an organic building block?  It isn't as simple as you think.

50% of our jink dna is the same as yeast. Remnants of billions of years of evolution.

(May 13, 2018 at 11:00 pm)ignoramus Wrote: Min, it's amazing how they believe that the God of the bible can even possibly exist!

An advanced alien, sure, but advanced aliens don't dish out extra lives when you die.
Which of course begs the question ...why bother then

God is a green 1up mushroom!

Huggy74 Wrote:

Tizheruk Wrote:Huggy does realize that Abiogenesis isn't atheism ? And no Huggy your ignorance of biochemistry does not mean there is no evidence of Abiogenesis. And even if it was an absurd view it does not make your view any less a proposition of magic .So once again your attempted appeal to hypocrisy and lame virtue point scoring fails . Someone else's bad idea's doesn't validate yours .

I'm not speaking to Atheism, I'm speaking to the OP and 99% of the atheists on this forum who accept abiogenesis as a plausible explanation of how life began.

Biochemistry has nothing to do with abiogenesis, since it posits that life arose from non-life, so if anyone of you believe there is proof that life arose from non-life, present it.

We don't accept it because we're atheists. We accept it because we go with what the science says. We do that (most atheists who post here) because we don't have holy scriptures we think tell us not to. Religious people who don't believe their holy scriptures are telling them not to believe the findings of scientists can accept it, too; and hundreds of millions do.

To theists- A logical insight into Atheism


That the sum total of 2000 years m/l of Christianity has not yet converged on a single 'True Christian Bible/Jesus Church' is telling. In actual fact, Christianity continues to mutate and schism at a faster and faster rate.

It belies itself.

(May 12, 2018 at 9:45 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

Life creating itself is, ironically, the claim of theism, not of atheism. Or is God dead? Atheists believe the uncaused cause isn't alive... unlike theists.

(May 13, 2018 at 4:32 am)Huggy74 Wrote: You obviously don't get my point.

If you claim that life began through abiogenesis, THEN YOU ARE CLEARLY NOT SAYING YOU DONT KNOW HOW LIFE BEGAN.

My point is how can you even claim abiogenesis in the first place when there is not one shred of evidence?

THIEST: Life began therefore God

ATHEIST: Life exists so therefore abiogenesis

Again how are you any different from a so-called fundie?

How does a star that's initially composed of nothing but hydrogen atoms produce other elements such as oxygen, iron, and gold?

thermonuclear magic?

(May 15, 2018 at 1:20 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(May 13, 2018 at 4:32 am)Huggy74 Wrote: You obviously don't get my point.

If you claim that life began through abiogenesis, THEN YOU ARE CLEARLY NOT SAYING YOU DONT KNOW HOW LIFE BEGAN.

My point is how can you even claim abiogenesis in the first place when there is not one shred of evidence?

THIEST: Life began therefore God

ATHEIST: Life exists so therefore abiogenesis

Again how are you any different from a so-called fundie?

How does a star that's initially composed of nothing but hydrogen atoms produce other elements such as oxygen, iron, and gold?

What does this have to do with life?

---

(May 14, 2018 at 12:04 am)ignoramus Wrote: 50% of our jink dna is the same as yeast. Remnants of billions of years of evolution.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...131659.htm

Quote:Researchers at the University of Michigan Life Sciences Institute and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute have determined how satellite DNA, considered to be "junk DNA," plays a crucial role in holding the genome together.

Their findings, published recently in the journal eLife, indicate that this genetic "junk" performs the vital function of ensuring that chromosomes bundle correctly inside the cell's nucleus, which is necessary for cell survival. And this function appears to be conserved across many species.

This pericentromeric satellite DNA consists of a very simple, highly repetitive sequence of genetic code. Although it accounts for a substantial portion of our genome, satellite DNA does not contain instructions for making any specific proteins. What's more, its repetitive nature is thought to make the genome less stable and more susceptible to damage or disease. Until fairly recently, scientists believed this so-called "junk" or "selfish" DNA did not serve any real purpose.

"But we were not quite convinced by the idea that this is just genomic junk," said Yukiko Yamashita, research professor at the LSI and lead author on the study. "If we don't actively need it, and if not having it would give us an advantage, then evolution probably would have gotten rid of it. But that hasn't happened."

Breakthrough study overturns theory of 'junk DNA' in genome

Quote:Long stretches of DNA previously dismissed as "junk" are in fact crucial to the way our genome works, an international team of researchers said on Wednesday.

(May 8, 2018 at 2:33 am)ignoramus Wrote: I'd like theists to read this. Just to "get" why we are the way we are.
I won't post an opinion, nothing derogatory. Just the facts.
If anyone disagrees, tell us why.

[EDITED] As skeptics, (of which atheism is a subset) Thanks guys...my bad.

Firstly, this is an extrapolation from another post which had me thinking.
For the sake of this post, we won't even bring any negativity, either real or perceived, which has come about from belief in "any" God.

As atheists we consider the following:

Antivaxxers
Flatearthers
Mormons
Scientologists
Palm reading
Astrology
Divine miracles (as described in the holy books)
Supernatural (as described in the holy books)

all as equals. They share exactly the same lowest common denominator. Namely 0% proof.
Obviously, if we aren't going to use the word proof in the scientific sense, then why even bother discussing the validity of anything :dunno

Theists, please understand that as people who are guided by "facts" (and so are all of you with every other aspect of your lives),
We atheists really cannot differentiate between all the woo above. (from a scientific and logical perspective) We don't treat the core proponents of religion any different.
My question is should we?
Or more importantly, could we?
Without making compromises to our thought processes? As we all know, we can't control what we believe.

But Supernatural is awesome.

And Dean is welcome to stay over at my place whenever he wants.