Abiogenesis is impossible

[Rampant.A.I.]

That makes sense. The question is, did he create smallpox from the very beginning, or at some later point?

from a resource prospective: disease, wars, and famine control population.
again, earth and universe weren't designed for ultimate perfection. God's plan doesn't include keeping all pain, suffering, and all expression of sin from coming into existence; the garden of eden wasn't secured under lock and key. if sin (which grow into evil) and its effect continued forever, then there would be a real cogent argument against God's nature and even His existence, but both physical and mental suffering is temporary.

The all-powerful couldn't produce a perfect universe, or chose not to, thereby allowing suffering, until God allows you to be sent to hell, for an eternity of suffering in agony by the evil God allows.

[quote='Tonus' pid='635360' dateline='1395840155']also there's human involvement like 1) improper hygiene - God laid out health law practices and instructions for quarantines in leviticus. 2) making poor choices or engaging in sinful behavior which has consequences including disease.
free will has cost and benefits.

Smallpox: It's your fault, sinner.

[Sejanus]

if human are to exist, this U's enormous mass is critical: one reason is that with less density, stars and planets wouldn't form. the expansion rate would be so rapid that gravity wouldn't have the opportunity to pull together the gas and dust to form them. God doesn't create anything that doesn't serve a purpose.

Two words: anthropic principle.

[Tonus]

from a resource prospective: disease, wars, and famine control population.
again, earth and universe weren't designed for ultimate perfection. God's plan doesn't include keeping all pain, suffering, and all expression of sin from coming into existence; the garden of eden wasn't secured under lock and key. if sin (which grow into evil) and its effect continued forever, then there would be a real cogent argument against God's nature and even His existence, but both physical and mental suffering is temporary.
also there's human involvement like 1) improper hygiene - God laid out health law practices and instructions for quarantines in leviticus. 2) making poor choices or engaging in sinful behavior which has consequences including disease.
free will has cost and benefits.

You're just making it up as you go along. Which demonstrates a problem with basing your religion on ancient texts written with many different purposes in mind. Once you have to go outside of the book to provide explanations for what is in it, it's all open to interpretation, hence the tens of thousands of Christian denominations.

It's also a bunch of nonsense. God seems unable to get a handle on population control. One minute he is wiping out nearly all life on the planet in a cataclysmic flood, next minute he is sending his chosen people to massacre whole groups of indigenous tribes, and when that fails he flogs humanity with an endless stream of diseases and genetic defects. And somehow he thinks that telling an ancient tribe of nomads to bury their fecal matter will sufficiently balance the scales.

And if what you say is true, then the costs and benefits of free will are imposed artificially and arbitrarily by an outside agent, thus negating the whole concept of free will. This is what happens when you are forced to fill in the gaps in ancient stories that are cobbled together from campfire tales.

[snowtracks]

if human are to exist, this U's enormous mass is critical: one reason is that with less density, stars and planets wouldn't form. the expansion rate would be so rapid that gravity wouldn't have the opportunity to pull together the gas and dust to form them. God doesn't create anything that doesn't serve a purpose.

Two words: anthropic principle.

with only a smidgen extra mass (less than 1%), the universe would have expanded so slowing that stars would have rapidly become black holes and neutron stars so this anthropic principle as it relates to gravitational force parameters would seem to connote intentionality.

[Chas]

Two words: anthropic principle.

with only a smidgen extra mass (less than 1%), the universe would have expanded so slowing that stars would have rapidly become black holes and neutron stars so this anthropic principle as it relates to gravitational force parameters would seem to connote intentionality.

Can you show that it could have had more mass? Or less?

I'll wait.

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

Hmm. Not sure why this tab was up. What should I post HERE?!

Hmm... BIOLOGY is SEXY

Nope.

SCIENCE is SEXY

Nope.

EVOLUTION is SEXY.

Oh wait, I know: Thread title = EPIC FAIL!

Carry on.

[Esquilax]

with only a smidgen extra mass (less than 1%), the universe would have expanded so slowing that stars would have rapidly become black holes and neutron stars so this anthropic principle as it relates to gravitational force parameters would seem to connote intentionality.

"Things could have been different, therefore god."

So what? You're having to presuppose that god exists just to present this as a problem for atheists! Fuck!

[Alex K]

Two words: anthropic principle.

with only a smidgen extra mass (less than 1%), the universe would have expanded so slowing that stars would have rapidly become black holes and neutron stars so this anthropic principle as it relates to gravitational force parameters would seem to connote intentionality.

To the extent that this is even a sensible phrase, no. Would seem to connote intentionality, please! That's just the claim of design couched in more pretentious language.

[tor]

So the debate is raging 84+ pages and still going strong.
Did he prove that abiogenesis is impossible yet? Any evidence show up?

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

So the debate is raging 84+ pages and still going strong.
Did he prove that abiogenesis is impossible yet? Any evidence show up?

NOPE. No evidence that abiogenesis is impossible EXISTS!