Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

[Esquilax]

Technically, this version of Lance Henriksen is an android (though he prefers the term 'synthetic person', of course) and doesn't care who knows it, unlike the undercover Ian Holm of the original. Let's see - do we know anyone around here who enjoys telling us that he's a created being? A 'child' of his 'god' so to speak, who presumably would revel being called Bishop?

Well, at least we know who to put in charge of casting!

[Jackalope]

Even after abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur in 1859, Charles Darwin persisted in speculating abiogenesis theory.

Wherever it is you are getting these "facts", do yourself a favor and stop.

What Pasteur discovered was wrong was the theory of "spontaneous generation", which was a competing theory of biogenesis, which is now known as abiogenesis (and which we know a hell of a lot more about than Pasteur or Darwin ever dreamed of).

They are not the same thing. I repeat, they are not the same thing. They are different, competing ideas, and spontaneous generation lost to abiogenesis.

Whoever told you that Pasteur debunked abiogenesis lied to you.

[downbeatplumb]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW1Lpa23mOw

[Anomalocaris]

Even after abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur in 1859, Charles Darwin persisted in speculating abiogenesis theory.

Wherever it is you are getting these "facts", do yourself a favor and stop.

What Pasteur discovered was wrong was the theory of "spontaneous generation", which was a competing theory of biogenesis, which is now known as abiogenesis (and which we know a hell of a lot more about than Pasteur or Darwin ever dreamed of).

They are not the same thing. I repeat, they are not the same thing. They are different, competing ideas, and spontaneous generation lost to abiogenesis.

Whoever told you that Pasteur debunked abiogenesis lied to you.

Why do you talk to her as if it is within her mental capacity to be influenced by the existence of facts which could contradict her "truth"?

To her slight neural capacity, truth is truth, facts is whatever sounds to her like it proves the truth, which never needed proving anyway.

[Jackalope]

Why do you talk to her as if it is with her mental capacity to be influenced by the existence of facts which could contradict her "truth"?

I misplaced my hammer.

[Alter2Ego]

Even after abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur in 1859, Charles Darwin persisted in speculating abiogenesis theory.

Wherever it is you are getting these "facts", do yourself a favor and stop.

What Pasteur discovered was wrong was the theory of "spontaneous generation", which was a competing theory of biogenesis, which is now known as abiogenesis (and which we know a hell of a lot more about than Pasteur or Darwin ever dreamed of).

They are not the same thing. I repeat, they are not the same thing. They are different, competing ideas, and spontaneous generation lost to abiogenesis.

Whoever told you that Pasteur debunked abiogenesis lied to you.

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
I do not have a clue how you could possibly think "spontaneous generation lost to abiogenesis," when the terms are synonyms. The theory of spontaneous generation and the theory of abiogenesis are one and the same. Both expressions refer to life coming to life from non-life, by itself. That is what Darwin proposed and what Louis Pasteur debunked.


DEFINITION OF ABIOGENESIS:
"The supposed development of living organisms from nonliving matter. Also called autogenesis, spontaneous generation."
http://www.yourdictionary.com/abiogenesis#websters


DEFINITION OF "SPONTANEOUS GENERATION":
"the theory, now discredited, that living organisms can originate in nonliving matter independently of other living matter; abiogenesis"
http://www.yourdictionary.com/spontaneou...n#websters


Notice the bolded word(s) within each of the above definitions, indicating they are synonyms and that they have the same meaning.

[Ryantology]

Did you and Godschild go to the same school and take the same biology course? I only ask because you two have demonstrated an equal capacity for not knowing what the fuck you're talking about.

[Alter2Ego]

What Pasteur discovered was wrong was the theory of "spontaneous generation", which was a competing theory of biogenesis, which is now known as abiogenesis (and which we know a hell of a lot more about than Pasteur or Darwin ever dreamed of).

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
You are confused. Spontaneous generation was never a competing theory of biogenesis because spontaneous generation/abiogenesis is the exact opposite of biogenesis. Whereas spontaneous generation/abiogenesis refer to life coming to life from non-life, by itself, Biogenesis refers to life coming to life from preexisting life.


DEFINITION OF "BIOGENESIS":
"bi•o•gen•e•sis (b-jn-ss) also bi•og•e•ny (b-j-n)
n.
1. The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms and not from nonliving matter.
2. Generation of living organisms from other living organisms."
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/biogenesis



The debunked theory of abiogenesis/spontaneous generation is the life-line for atheists who insist there is no Jehovah.

[Esquilax]

The debunked theory of abiogenesis/spontaneous generation is the life-line for atheists who insist there is no Jehovah

Before you get all haughty, I'd ask you who created Jehovah. Because, and let's be absolutely clear here, you believe in spontaneously generated life from nothing, not the atheists.

Don't sit there and tut at us when you believe a much less credible version of the same theory, dressed up in magic so you don't have to think too hard about it.

[downbeatplumb]

What Pasteur discovered was wrong was the theory of "spontaneous generation", which was a competing theory of biogenesis, which is now known as abiogenesis (and which we know a hell of a lot more about than Pasteur or Darwin ever dreamed of).

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
You are confused. Spontaneous generation was never a competing theory of biogenesis because spontaneous generation/abiogenesis is the exact opposite of biogenesis. Whereas spontaneous generation/abiogenesis refer to life coming to life from non-life, by itself, Biogenesis refers to life coming to life from preexisting life.


DEFINITION OF "BIOGENESIS":
"bi•o•gen•e•sis (b-jn-ss) also bi•og•e•ny (b-j-n)
n.
1. The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms and not from nonliving matter.
2. Generation of living organisms from other living organisms."
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/biogenesis



The debunked theory of abiogenesis/spontaneous generation is the life-line for atheists who insist there is no Jehovah.

Here's a little history.
In the old days before people really understood about microscopic creatures they believed that life spontaneously appeared from nowhere because they had no understanding that the air is full of bacteria and spores or that flies laid eggs in exposed meat.

Spontaneous generation is an obsolete body of thought on the ordinary formation of living organisms without descent from similar organisms. Typically, the idea was that certain forms such as fleas could arise from inanimate matter such as dust, or that maggots could arise from dead flesh. A variant idea was that of equivocal generation, in which species such as tapeworms arose from unrelated living organisms, now understood to be their hosts.

This old debunked theory was commonly used to explain maggots and not to explain the origin of life.

Abiogenesis may have only happened once but that would be enough to explain all life on earth and it is the only real explanation that actually has a chance of being real.