Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 7:06 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
#21
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
I am pressed for time right now as I have to leave for work. But if I must, I can spoon feed you the basic biology answers to your questions when I get back. If I go to that much trouble though, I'd like you to first answer my questions: Were you home schooled and if not, did you pay any attention whatsoever in biology class?
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Reply
#22
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 7:36 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I know enough obviously.

No, you clearly don't. You think you do, but the mark of experience is training, so what qualifications do you have? Where are you getting your information from? What's your diploma?

Quote:Can you provide answers to any of these simple questions?

I did, in my earlier post.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee

Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Reply
#23
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 7:47 am)Esquilax Wrote:
(October 3, 2013 at 7:36 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I know enough obviously.

No, you clearly don't. You think you do, but the mark of experience is training, so what qualifications do you have? Where are you getting your information from? What's your diploma?

Quote:Can you provide answers to any of these simple questions?

I did, in my earlier post.

And the care and effort you put into that and many other posts will be ignored, as it has in each of his threads to date. Hell, having been spoon-fed the myriad reasons why Pascal's Wager is a joke, he still declares that it's a good argument. Does anyone actually believe that giving him evidence of any sort would matter at this point?

There's no reasoning with this person. It's like playing basketball with someone who just changes the rules whenever it suits him. He is a deeply dishonest person (or as I like to call them: a fundamentalist Christian).
Reply
#24
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 7:40 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: An organelle canot reproduce or even survive. It is way too complex to be the first creature.

Think about atoms this way, they are like pieces of Lego that fit together with other pieces in a certain way. They are also slightly charged, so some pieces attract each other, while others stay as far away as possible from each other. Atoms and ions build up molecules, molecules clumped together make bigger systems and so forth. Nothing truly complex about that really. Take an aqueous environment where there are polar molecules that are dissolved, but also non-polar compounds, like lipids. Lipids and water is a no go, so to reach the a low energy state, the lipids clump together, forming a membrane by turning their polar head towards the water and the non-polar tail tucked in. Ta-dah, you just have your first (albeit empty) micelle! The beauty of the membrane is that it forms a certain protection from the outside, so some molecules (trapped by mistake or absorbed through the membrane) were caught inside and circumstances were better on the inside of the micelle than the outside. Introduce self-replicating RNA, mitochondrions, chloroplasts, double membranes and voilá! A micelle starts to look more like a cell than an empty membrane.

Quote:RNA would not even make a living creature.

Techically, RNA is the living 'creature'.

Quote:How many nucleotides did it have in its RNA code?

Four.

Quote:How did DNA evolve then?

By RNA wrapping around itself or other RNA molecules and thus reaching a more stable way of existing.

Quote:No real answers then just a dance around.

[Image: tumblr_inline_mtta5k4wzS1rsa4jg.gif]
When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura

Reply
#25
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 7:47 am)Brakeman Wrote: I am pressed for time right now as I have to leave for work. But if I must, I can spoon feed you the basic biology answers to your questions when I get back. If I go to that much trouble though, I'd like you to first answer my questions: Were you home schooled and if not, did you pay any attention whatsoever in biology class?

And an additional question: did you ever attend a decent university?
When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura

Reply
#26
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 7:53 am)Crossless1 Wrote:
(October 3, 2013 at 7:47 am)Esquilax Wrote: No, you clearly don't. You think you do, but the mark of experience is training, so what qualifications do you have? Where are you getting your information from? What's your diploma?


I did, in my earlier post.

And the care and effort you put into that and many other posts will be ignored, as it has in each of his threads to date. Hell, having been spoon-fed the myriad reasons why Pascal's Wager is a joke, he still declares that it's a good argument. Does anyone actually believe that giving him evidence of any sort would matter at this point?

There's no reasoning with this person. It's like playing basketball with someone who just changes the rules whenever it suits him. He is a deeply dishonest person (or as I like to call them: a fundamentalist Christian).

Yep. We should just agree to say nothing but to refer him back to Esquilax's post(or any suitably well responded post) until this Nimrod addresses the answers he claims to want.
Reply
#27
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
SBTGF, You are a fucking moron. You obviously have no understanding of Evolution, or Biology in general. Fuck off and come back when you have educated yourself. This is not some mantra that we chant at people we disagree with 'educate yourself, educate yourself, educate yourself'
We say this because you are incredibly ignorant of the things you are talking about. And you have the arrogance to pretend that you know what you are talking about and you think you can just dismiss all scientific evidence and theories simply because you don't understand them.
What was that saying? Something along the lines of: There are two things in this world that are infinite: the universe and human stupidity.
I definitely believe one of them now.
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain

'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House

“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom

"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
Reply
#28
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 8:05 am)Kayenneh Wrote:
(October 3, 2013 at 7:40 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: An organelle canot reproduce or even survive. It is way too complex to be the first creature.

Think about atoms this way, they are like pieces of Lego that fit together with other pieces in a certain way. They are also slightly charged, so some pieces attract each other, while others stay as far away as possible from each other. Atoms and ions build up molecules, molecules clumped together make bigger systems and so forth. Nothing truly complex about that really. Take an aqueous environment where there are polar molecules that are dissolved, but also non-polar compounds, like lipids. Lipids and water is a no go, so to reach the a low energy state, the lipids clump together, forming a membrane by turning their polar head towards the water and the non-polar tail tucked in. Ta-dah, you just have your first (albeit empty) micelle! The beauty of the membrane is that it forms a certain protection from the outside, so some molecules (trapped by mistake or absorbed through the membrane) were caught inside and circumstances were better on the inside of the micelle than the outside. Introduce self-replicating RNA, mitochondrions, chloroplasts, double membranes and voilá! A micelle starts to look more like a cell than an empty membrane.

Quote:RNA would not even make a living creature.

Techically, RNA is the living 'creature'.

Quote:How many nucleotides did it have in its RNA code?

Four.

Quote:How did DNA evolve then?

By RNA wrapping around itself or other RNA molecules and thus reaching a more stable way of existing.

Quote:No real answers then just a dance around.

[Image: tumblr_inline_mtta5k4wzS1rsa4jg.gif]

RNA by itself does not make a creature at all. It needs proteins to actually do anything or to protect itself from the outside world. It also needs proteins to use the RNA to make more proteins. It also needs proteins to control the production of proteins. It also needs proteins to speed up the chemical reactions so they do not take eons to occur.

RNA does not wrap around itself to from DNA. The actual codes are different and needs a complex translation mechanism
The mechanism would never evolve because their is no survival without it fully functioning.

What was the RNA base code sequence?
How many nucleotides was it?
What proteins did it have?
What were their sequences?

Sorry no answer. You are dancing.
Reply
#29
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
So what qualifications do you have to be saying these things, Grace?
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee

Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Reply
#30
RE: Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)
(October 3, 2013 at 8:19 am)Esquilax Wrote: So what qualifications do you have to be saying these things, Grace?

I know a lot about Math, Statistics, Chemistry, Biology, Physics, and Logic.

Obviously enough to show the fallacy in AOS.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Not sure Stan will show up. Brian37 20 571 March 3, 2024 at 3:06 am
Last Post: no one
  Debunk the divine origin LinuxGal 35 2092 October 9, 2023 at 7:31 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  The false miracle of Fatima now a movie Foxaèr 17 1622 September 6, 2020 at 2:03 pm
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Can someone show me the evidence of the bullshit bible articles? I believe in Harry Potter 36 4536 November 3, 2019 at 7:33 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  World ending on April 23rd, says false prophet Divinity 41 8477 April 27, 2018 at 1:19 pm
Last Post: Abaddon_ire
  Josh McDowell and the "atheistic" Internet Jehanne 43 6029 February 8, 2018 at 1:32 pm
Last Post: Crossless2.0
  Supernatural denial, atheistic hypocrisy? Victory123 56 9295 February 1, 2018 at 10:49 pm
Last Post: polymath257
  Satan, anti-christ, false prophet vorlon13 43 8068 November 14, 2017 at 12:06 pm
Last Post: Harry Nevis
  Some questions for you Joz 16 3343 January 29, 2017 at 1:56 pm
Last Post: Athene
  A Simple Way to Shut Up a Street Preacher Jonah 44 28325 August 12, 2016 at 11:25 pm
Last Post: robvalue



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)