Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)

[Doubting Thomas]

SavedByGrace, are you done shitting all over the chess board yet?

I wouldn't have enough faith that Grace can play chess, if i'm honest.

I'm referring to playing chess with pigeons. I'm just waiting for SBG to fly back to his coop to claim victory.

[Zazzy]

RNA have catalytic properties ... duh. So they do not need proteins to function. They don't even need to function, just survive long enough to replicate.

The fact that you're asking for RNA sequences says a lot about your ignorance of genetics.

For anyone interested (probably not the OP), a good paper on this. Especially see the conclusion which deals with evolutionary implications.

So far, our identification of catalytic RNAs is too limited to support the idea that a cell based only on catalytic RNAs could exist now (edit: which of course doesn't say much about what could have been before the evident evolution of genes encoding RNAs). But it's a young field, and the field of the minimal genome is rising.

Another excellent Forterre paper on the topic.

[Kayenneh]

He read an old book once. What else could he possibly need?

You think he can read?

Yes. It's the comprehension I have my doubts about

[pocaracas]

Your answer is almost non existent.

Show calculations - none given. Just that it equaled 100%. That means no answers.

Code lengths - none given

Actual codes - none given

RNA - you said yes. But cannot even attempt the DNA code which could not develop by natural selection.
Number of codes in RNA - you said a few. That would mean about 50,000 or more I guess, since a creature would not survive or evolve with less. No mention of the proteins though. Without a large number of certain proteins the creature dies. And the miraculous RNA code must match the proteins of the creature, the enzymes for reaction, etc.
Therefore NO answer given.

2nd, 3rd 4th creatures ... up to first cell - No answer. If you say a few fro the code length, the sequence is even longer and very impossible.

Upward evolution with calculations - none

Other question on upward not even given.

Fossile record - ignored questions.

55 million years - no scientific measurement is ever given without a +- range on error.

That is not even science and indicates someone is hiding the truth. Where you got that number from is deceived.

No answers.

Your argument is a double-edge sword, you know that, don't you?

Show god.... none given.
Present calculations for god.... none presented.
Present god's magic... none presented.

Hence god is not the solution to the problem of origins.

Proof 2 - grade F. (as in FAIL)

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

RNA have catalytic properties ... duh. So they do not need proteins to function. They don't even need to function, just survive long enough to replicate.

The fact that you're asking for RNA sequences says a lot about your ignorance of genetics.

An RNA sequence is needed to make proteins. It must be an exact sequence else the protein will not work.

[TheBeardedDude]

RNA have catalytic properties ... duh. So they do not need proteins to function. They don't even need to function, just survive long enough to replicate.

The fact that you're asking for RNA sequences says a lot about your ignorance of genetics.

An RNA sequence is needed to make proteins. It must be an exact sequence else the protein will not work.

Amino acids are needed to make proteins and amino acids can be and have been produced via abiotic reactions.

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

Don't have a ton of time at the moment to fully address everything in the post, but in general, if you could prove science were wrong, it does not logically follow that religion must be correct. That is a non sequitur.

As to the fossil record, there are such things as stupid questions, and yours are exactly that.

The Fossil record shows the progression from the most basal of organisms (archaea to bacteria to eukarya to metazoa and then the radiation and diversification of the metazoans from the Phanerozoic onwards as life transitions from the ocean to land and then to air).

What do you might be exact dates? Radiometric dates? Those are pretty easy to find. If you are looking for a Paleozoic birth record for Tiktaalik that lists day and time, then your question is moronic.

That is how the sediments would have been sorted by a wash in from the flood.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

He read an old book once. What else could he possibly need?

You think he can read?

Well she knows enough to copy and paste from apologist websites, so, that's something.

---

He read an old book once. What else could he possibly need?

You think he can read?

Well she knows enough to copy and paste from apologist websites, so, that's something.

[TheBeardedDude]

Don't have a ton of time at the moment to fully address everything in the post, but in general, if you could prove science were wrong, it does not logically follow that religion must be correct. That is a non sequitur.

As to the fossil record, there are such things as stupid questions, and yours are exactly that.

The Fossil record shows the progression from the most basal of organisms (archaea to bacteria to eukarya to metazoa and then the radiation and diversification of the metazoans from the Phanerozoic onwards as life transitions from the ocean to land and then to air).

What do you might be exact dates? Radiometric dates? Those are pretty easy to find. If you are looking for a Paleozoic birth record for Tiktaalik that lists day and time, then your question is moronic.

That is how the sediments would have been sorted by a wash in from the flood.

How come no other storm/flood deposits do that?

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

[hide]
Your answer is almost non existent.

Show calculations - none given. Just that it equaled 100%. That means no answers.

No that means life happened

Code lengths - none given

Why should I - look them up yourself.

Actual codes - none given

You want to write out RNA codes in a post? Fuck off.

RNA - you said yes. But cannot even attempt the DNA code which could not develop by natural selection.

Wrong - it did plainly.

Number of codes in RNA - you said a few. That would mean about 50,000 or more I guess, since a creature would not survive or evolve with less. No mention of the proteins though. Without creation ons the creature dies. And the miraculous RNA code must match the proteins of the creature, the enzymes for reaction.
NO answer given.

It was given previously: "The components of simple viruses such as TMV, which consists of a single RNA molecule and one protein species, undergo self-assembly if they are mixed in solution."

See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21523/

2nd, 3rd 4th creatures ... up to first cell - No answer. If you say a few fro the code length, the sequence is even longer and very impossible.

I did answer - you ignored my answer because you know you are asking for something impossible. I called you disingenuous but that was my mistake as I assumed you understood the word.


Upward evolution with calculations - none

Answered in detail - why are you lying now? Is your case that weak?

Other question on upward not even given.

Could you rephrase this so it makes sense.

Fossile record - ignored questions. LIAR

55 million years - no scientific measurement is ever given without a +- range on error.

Oh gee- you got me 55 million plus or minus 2 million.

That is not even science and indicates someone is hiding the truth. Where you got that number from is deceived.

No answers.

Answered in all the detail it deserved.
No God.
I win.

How did you calculate the +- 2 million?

Show real error analysis and back up the data.