Abiogenesis is impossible

[Cyberman]

'Science is the process of finding out how "God" did it.'

Congratulations - that is the single dumbest thing I've read this year. And I've read some dumb shit, believe me.

[Cyberman]

“The universe was framed by God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” that means no space, time, matter, and energy. --- it's called creation ex nihilo (latin for “creation from nothing”).

So magic, then?

[LostLocke]

“The universe was framed by God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” that means no space, time, matter, and energy. --- it's called creation ex nihilo (latin for “creation from nothing”).

So then, something can come from nothing?

But, yet, they argue that the universe couldn't have come from nothing, so God must have created it....


I'm getting confused, which way is it you guys lean?

[snowtracks]

“The universe was framed by God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” that means no space, time, matter, and energy. --- it's called creation ex nihilo (latin for “creation from nothing”).

So magic, then?

'magic' connotes deception, 'then' that's the wrong word. we know that the random universe generator or whatever your ilk believes in didn't do it because beings have the potential capability to reflect back upon it, but it has no capability to reflect on us. the mind has an infinite order of magnitude greater than matter. matter cannot generate mind.

[Sejanus]

So magic, then?

'magic' connotes deception, 'then' that's the wrong word. we know that the random universe generator or whatever your ilk believes in didn't do it because beings have the potential capability to reflect back upon it, but it has no capability to reflect on us. the mind has an infinite order of magnitude greater than matter. matter cannot generate mind.

Says whom?

[The Valkyrie]

So magic, then?

'magic' connotes deception, 'then' that's the wrong word. we know that the random universe generator or whatever your ilk believes in didn't do it because beings have the potential capability to reflect back upon it, but it has no capability to reflect on us. the mind has an infinite order of magnitude greater than matter. matter cannot generate mind.

"your ilk"

Charming . . .

[Cyberman]

'magic' connotes deception,

Not necessarily, but that depends on how you're defining 'magic'. Shall I swap it for 'Miracle'? Does that make more sense?

See, you run into trouble when you can replace one undefined word with another undefined word and have no change in the sense of the argument.

'then' that's the wrong word.

Frivolous and fatuous. It's my word of choice, for structural purposes.

we know that the random universe generator or whatever your ilk believes in didn't do it because beings have the potential capability to reflect back upon it, but it has no capability to reflect on us.

My ilk? My ilk? I'm tempted to lose my cool and call you an arrogant arsehole, but I prophesy that's exactly what you want. So I won't.

Who says that I or my "ilk" believes in this thing which you're mocking? Regardless, how do we "know" what you're asserting? Please share a peer-reviewed article supporting it.

the mind has an infinite order of magnitude greater than matter. matter cannot generate mind.

Try removing your brain, drop it into a blender, then get back to us with the evidence that your mind is unaffected.

(I leave all the low-hanging fruit for others to pick.)

[Cyberman]

Says whom?

Says who. 'Whom' is the object of the sentence, having something done to it. 'Who' is the subject; the thing doing the something.

[LostLocke]

the mind has an infinite order of magnitude greater than matter. matter cannot generate mind.

Try removing your brain, drop it into a blender, then get back to us with the evidence that your mind is unaffected.

Assuming it actually makes a difference.....

[Cyberman]

Fruit number one down, ladies and gents! Hurry while stocks last!