Fundies Will Be Shitting Bricks

[orogenicman]

So then you are saying that mono-chiral amino acids can be spontaneously generated on earth? No lab tests have ever shown that can even happen in the lab, much less in nature.

It is your claim that mono-chiral amino acids cannot be spontaneously generated on Earth. As such, it is your claim to back up. Simply saying that it is so doesn't make it so. I've seen nothing in the literature that backs up your claim.

Actually life living in these conditions is what is irrelevant. That in no way proves that peptides could form naturally outside of the cell 3.5 million years ago. Let’s stay on topic here.

Actually, it is very relevant. We know that life existed on Earth 3.5 billionb years ago, and since it did, it was obviously using peptides to FORM the cell wall. Furthermore,

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8233/8233notw1.html

No I said that amino acids don’t align themselves naturally outside of the cell. The burden of proof is on you since you are the one claiming this is how life began 3.5 billion years ago. First prove this can happen in nature and then prove it did happen in nature 3.5 billion years ago.

Erm, no as per the bolded statement, you've once again made a claim that you haven't supported.

You claimed you had historical documents proving that slavery in biblical times was like American slavery. When I challenged you to produce these documents you change the subject to whether or not slavery existed in those times? I am still waiting for these documents.

You'll have to point out where I said I had documents proving slavery in historical times was like American slavery. I said it was likely much worse in biblical times than it was 170 years ago. But let me ask you a question. Do you deny that slavery occurred in the Middle East in biblical times? Are you denying that Abraham had slaves?

Ahh, so first it was “There is no evidence that the exodus ever occurred.” But after I pointed out that Nat-Geo found writings in Egyptian caves produced by Israelites that dated back to the times of Moses you just say, “Well Nat-Geo is wrong!” So let’s be clear here, there is plenty of evidence for the exodus, there is just no evidence you will accept because you are biased on such matters. As the quote below demonstrates, there is loads of evidence supporting the exodus.

Once again, you've made a claim you haven't substantiated. I did a search for such a national geographic article and didn't find it. So if you've got it handy, perhaps you could use it to back up your claim. Furthermore, perhaps you could explain how, if it exists, evidence for Israelit writings in an Egyptian cave prove that the exodus exists. And finally, it is religionists that claim the exodus exists. As such, it is their claim to prove. It is not my claim to disprove.

“Before Moses, the Bible records that the Israelites were enslaved by their Egyptian hosts (Exodus 1:8-14). In the Brooklyn Museum (p.276, fig. 310) resides a papyrus scroll numbered Brooklyn 35:1446 which was acquired in the late 19th century by Charles Wilbour. This dates to the reign of Sobekhotep III, the predecessor of Neferhotep I and so the pharaoh who reigned one generation before Moses. This papyrus is a decree by the pharaoh for a transfer of slaves. Of the 95 names of slaves mentioned in the letter, 50% are Semitic in origin. What is more, it lists the names of these slaves in the original Semitic language and then adds the Egyptian name each had been assigned, which is something the Bible records the Egyptians as doing, cf. Joseph’s name given to him by pharaoh (Genesis 41:45). Some of the Semitic names are biblical and include:- Menahem, Issachar, Asher, and Shiprah (cf. Exodus 1:15-21).

According to this:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl...rmd%3Divns

It is dated to the reign of Amenemhet III. And according to this, it is not a decreee. It is a list of names of people in a prison or labor camp. Whther of not they were foreigners, it still says nothing about whether the exodus occurred.

That 50% of the names are Israelite

According to who? Pat Robertson? It's a list of names of a possible prison or labor group. It proves nothing.

Even the Ipuwer Papyrus gives a detailed account of the Biblical plagues…

Even if this were true, so what?

So you dodged my question a third time? I have a moral justification as to why slavery is wrong, I have asked for you to give one three times now and you have not. So is it safe for me to assume you have none? If you can’t justify why slavery is wrong, then why would you object to it being in the Bible?

No Statler. You are not going to turn your own lame argument around and use it against me. Any moral person knows slavery is wrong. It is a violation of basic human rights that all people possess. I don't have to justify my position that slavery is wrong. You have to justify why it is NOT, since that is apparently your position. And Statler, I don't object that it is in the bible. You've missed the point entirely. The point is that many of the people of the bible (Abraham, for instance) were slave holders, and as such why would ANY moral person follow the teachings of these people?

I already answered that, it is impossible to provide logical confirmation of abiogenesis in the lab, so I would see no reason to drop my faith and run with something that has no logical basis.

I would say that you are going to be very embarrassed when you are proven wrong, but you are in such denial about everything else that I shouldn't expect you to accept any evidence that goes counter to your religious beliefs.