DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

I've already read all about A Bio Genesis. An intelligent creator would stlll definitely be required, because their only theory of how life came to be is that it "just all happened naturally dude" That is vague and it means nothing. Also, abiogenesis has been criticisized and refuted by numerous scientists, just so you know.


1. They did not re-create the correct environment for the time period this would have happened in the Miller-Urey research experiments.


2. Proteins don't bind under water, in fact they do just the opposite.


3. Louis Pasteur's 1859 experiment is widely seen as having settled the question of spontaneous generation and disproved abiogenesis. He boiled a meat broth in a flask that had a long neck that curved downward, like that of a goose or swan.


And there is a lot more reading you should do about this unproven hypothesis you are so convinced by, because no one in the science community really seems convinced.

I'm willing to read any articles on the subject. I am convinced that abiogenesis occurred because it is supported by a preponderance of peer-reviewed evidence. Contrary to your claim, however, abiogenesis has much credibility in the scientific community. There are presently several viable hypotheses on how abiogenesis occurred. See the Wiki article above.

---

They knew what was good and at risk.  They probably saw animals die so they knew what death was.  It was a miracle regarding the snake.  The devil was able to speak through it.

---

Through their rebellion sin entered the world.  I believe the devil was already here prior to man.  Since he was in the garden and I believe this happened after the devil was cast out of heaven.

---

I've already read all about A Bio Genesis. An intelligent creator would stlll definitely be required, because their only theory of how life came to be is that it "just all happened naturally dude" That is vague and it means nothing. Also, abiogenesis has been criticisized and refuted by numerous scientists, just so you know.


1. They did not re-create the correct environment for the time period this would have happened in the Miller-Urey research experiments.


2. Proteins don't bind under water, in fact they do just the opposite.


3. Louis Pasteur's 1859 experiment is widely seen as having settled the question of spontaneous generation and disproved abiogenesis. He boiled a meat broth in a flask that had a long neck that curved downward, like that of a goose or swan.


And there is a lot more reading you should do about this unproven hypothesis you are so convinced by, because no one in the science community really seems convinced.

I'm willing to read any articles on the subject. I am convinced that abiogenesis occurred because it is supported by a preponderance of peer-reviewed evidence. Contrary to your claim, however, abiogenesis has much credibility in the scientific community. There are presently several viable hypotheses on how abiogenesis occurred. See the Wiki article above.

---

They knew what was good and at risk.  They probably saw animals die so they knew what death was.  It was a miracle regarding the snake.  The devil was able to speak through it.

---

Do you love Marx, Freud, and Darwin?