Posts: 2174
Threads: 89
Joined: August 26, 2012
Reputation:
38
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 7:53 am
(November 5, 2013 at 8:56 pm)snowtracks Wrote: brought up the eye, the optic nerve, the brain - the reason for the 3 is that they can't exist singularly: for instance the brain setting there pulsating by itself with thoughts, one being - would be good to see what's around here. it's all or nothing simultaneously for biosystem that are interconnected.
All three of those organs are composites of individual cells. Please tell us why a eye cell, nerve cell, and a brain cell can't live without each other despite the fact that for the most part they never come in contact with each other.
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 11:38 am
(November 5, 2013 at 8:56 pm)snowtracks Wrote: The fbi profiler methodology which was started by john douglas is that they look at the evidence and work backwards for the identity. seems like a reasonable approach to be used here.
Is that what you think you're doing?
Because what you've actually done is preconceived the identity of the guilty party and then attempted to interpret the evidence to fit that conclusion.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 3:24 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 11:38 am)Faith No More Wrote: Because what you've actually done is preconceived the identity of the guilty party and then attempted to interpret the evidence to fit that conclusion.
Ah the old Alabama "we saw a coloured guy near the crime scene" technique.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 4940
Threads: 99
Joined: April 17, 2011
Reputation:
45
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2013 at 5:18 pm by Doubting Thomas.)
(November 5, 2013 at 8:56 pm)snowtracks Wrote: what about looking at it this way hypothetically: if God exist, the other things makes sense.
What about, if the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, then the other things make sense? You still haven't proven your god to the exclusion of all others.
Again, use the scientific method to explain how God created the universe and all life on earth. What are the mechanics behind it?
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Posts: 950
Threads: 1
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 8:17 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2013 at 8:23 pm by snowtracks.)
(November 5, 2013 at 9:29 pm)Zazzy Wrote: Can snowtracks name another living evolutionary biologist besides Dawkins without Googling it?
C'mon, snowtracks. Be honest. Name one other evolutionary biologist, WITHOUT GOOGLING.
f. crick, and j. monod (chance and necessity) - always give the customer more than they ask for.
(November 5, 2013 at 10:41 pm)Esquilax Wrote: (November 5, 2013 at 8:56 pm)snowtracks Wrote: brought up the eye, the optic nerve, the brain - the reason for the 3 is that they can't exist singularly: for instance the brain setting there pulsating by itself with thoughts, one being - would be good to see what's around here. it's all or nothing simultaneously for biosystem that are interconnected.
So, when I posted a few sentences on how these things developed, you just ignored them? Or are you lying, right now? Asshole, or idiot: which is it, Snowy?
Besides, the three wouldn't just pop into existence fully formed either, you buffoon: the brain and the eye developed in concert. As I've mentioned previously, it isn't a question of brain and then eye and then optic nerve to connect them; all developments within the body are informed, in terms of their success or failure, by the other parts of the body. The eye begins as light sensitive cells, which are good for sensing danger in a general sense. Then in certain cases those cells cup, and now you've got directional light, and so on, and so forth. You can read all about this in science books, which it's clear you've never even touched.
I wonder what your excuse will be next.
[
wouldn't posted if i thought i would make the poor guy go all nutzie.
Atheist Credo: A universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 8:34 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 8:17 pm)snowtracks Wrote: wouldn't posted if i thought i would make the poor guy go all nutzie.
So I take it you have no excuse for your dishonest behavior, nor anything approaching an argument with actual content or evidentiary support?
Next time, a nice, brief "derp" will be more than enough, Snowy.
"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!
Posts: 950
Threads: 1
Joined: October 10, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2013 at 9:00 pm by snowtracks.)
(November 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: (November 5, 2013 at 8:56 pm)snowtracks Wrote: what about looking at it this way hypothetically: if God exist, the other things makes sense.
What about, if the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, then the other things make sense? You still haven't proven your god to the exclusion of all others.
Again, use the scientific method to explain how God created the universe and all life on earth. What are the mechanics behind it?
you probably already suspected God didn't give me personal revelation. by the way, that's one thing to be avoided - those that claim God gave THEM a message.
brain, eye, optic nerve formed together - unconsciousness can't do it. quantum amounts of information would have to maintained during the process and used precisely at precise time intervals. just think of all of those busy molecules doing their thing and no one even asked them to.
Atheist Credo: A universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Posts: 2174
Threads: 89
Joined: August 26, 2012
Reputation:
38
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 9:00 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm)snowtracks Wrote: you probably already suspected God didn't give me personal revelation. by the way, that's one thing to be avoided - those that claim God gave THEM a message. How are you different from the "inspired" authors of the bible books? How could they write the words of jesus when he was away from the disciples if god didn't tell them what to write?
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 9:05 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm)snowtracks Wrote: brain, eye, optic nerve formed together - unconsciousness can't do it.
How do you know?
Quote:quantum amounts of information would have to maintained during the process and used precisely at precise time intervals. just think of all of those busy molecules doing their thing and no one even asked them to.
How do you know, and what's your definition of "information?" Because, that's kind of an airy, vague word.
"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!
Posts: 879
Threads: 11
Joined: September 17, 2013
Reputation:
31
RE: Abiogenesis is impossible
November 6, 2013 at 9:52 pm
(November 6, 2013 at 8:17 pm)snowtracks Wrote: (November 5, 2013 at 9:29 pm)Zazzy Wrote: Can snowtracks name another living evolutionary biologist besides Dawkins without Googling it?
C'mon, snowtracks. Be honest. Name one other evolutionary biologist, WITHOUT GOOGLING.
f. crick, and j. monod (chance and necessity) - always give the customer more than they ask for.
Please learn to read, snowtracks. Crick died in 2004, and was hinky on evolution anyway. Monod died in the 70s.
So you can't name a living evolutionary biologist besides Dawkins (who hasn't done anything except popularize other people's research for decades). So you aren't exactly up on your evolutionary theory. Right-o. Go away now.
|
