(April 8, 2016 at 10:08 am)Esquilax Wrote:I view our universe similar to that of a video game, in which the characters have been programmed to a level of sophistication where they have the capacity to make decisions and have consciousness. We will likely one day be able to create a virtual reality with enormous complexity. Are they simply poofed into existence? No they aren't.(April 8, 2016 at 12:38 am)AAA Wrote: Why is design magic to you people? Engineers are not magicians.
They would be if they had to poof the things they made out of nothing. Don't play games with us.![]()
Quote:And yeah, a 5 second google search can also tell you that the earth is hollow. You can literally find anything on the internet. Also don't assume that all citations represent experiments, go read the primary articles. I guarantee they are highly speculative. That's fine, but don't pretend that it is the same as empirical/experimental science.
So what you're telling me is that you're a college student training to be a scientist... who refuses to do basic background research into a cornerstone principle of your field, even when many aspects of biology would not work if evolution were not a real, active phenomena.
And hey, I guess all those English Lit students don't need to know how to read, right? Reading isn't the same as literature!
I know the ideas of how it evolved. Once there was a competing solution of biomolecules. Eventually the cells began fermentation. This created an acidic environment to which the cell population responded by developing ATP driven pumps to move protons out. They then developed electron transport chains to move the protons out, which allowed the ATP pump to do the reverse and form ATP. Then gradually it developed into the sophisticated mechanisms employed by cells today. It's not that I won't do the research, it is that these ideas are not empirical, and therefore do not need to be taken as fact. In fact they should not be taken as fact by the scientific community. The rest of us should be scrutinizing these ideas until they can be supported more strongly. That is how ideas are supposed to be received in the scientific community, but you seem to want me to just accept ideas without empirical evidence as true when you like the philosophical implications.