What do real scientist say about Abiogenesis:Alexandre Meinesz:
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Einstein...The Creationists' Friend.
Next: look upon 231! not as #rearrangements but as volume or time Chapt 19 #221 Atom Totality
From: Jason on 14 Jul 2010 18:02 In article <UoqdnbFKMZQ5tKPRnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On 7/13/2010 11:18 PM, Jason wrote: > > In article<i1iujd$3k3$1(a)news.datemas.de>, "Anna DeGanno"<AD(a)invalid.com> > > wrote: > > > >> "Jason"<Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > >> news:Jason-1307101243130001(a)67-150-127-253.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > >>> > >>> I am an advocate of creation science. God creating life from non-life > >>> would be defined as "creation". Abiogenesis is for the most part a term > >>> that is used by evolutionists to explain how life began on this planet. > >>> The evolutionists do NOT believe that God played a role. For example, the > >>> primordial pond theory is a type of abiogenesis. How a word is used is > >>> very important. The word in question is used by evolutionists and not a > >>> word that is used in a positive way by the advocates of creation science. > >>> > >> > >> Why do you keep calling creation a science when it isn't science. It's > >> magical beliefs based on ancient scrolls. There is no evidence for a > >> magical mystical fantastical creation. > > > > It's magical to believe that life could evolve from non-life. > > > Do you understand the very thin line that separates life from non-life. > I suggest that you research the thinness of that line. > > It is certainly not magical to believe that common chemical elements > will combine with each other. It is magical to take something that > science hasn't yet found a solution and claim it is the province of a > magical god. A smart man like you needs to read a little history over > the last 400 years and learn just how small that box for god is getting. > Folks like you keep shoehorning him into smaller and smaller boxes > until....POOF..he's gone. Have you ever considered that God took the necessary chemical elements and combined them with each other to make life on this earth? That makes much more sense to me than to believe that it all happened by chance which is what most evolutionists do believe. Mankind is far too complex to have happened as a result of chance.
From: Anna DeGanno on 14 Jul 2010 18:18 "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1307102018170001(a)67-150-120-73.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > In article <i1iujd$3k3$1(a)news.datemas.de>, "Anna DeGanno" <AD(a)invalid.com> > wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-1307101243130001(a)67-150-127-253.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... >> > >> > I am an advocate of creation science. God creating life from non-life >> > would be defined as "creation". Abiogenesis is for the most part a term >> > that is used by evolutionists to explain how life began on this planet. >> > The evolutionists do NOT believe that God played a role. For example, >> > the >> > primordial pond theory is a type of abiogenesis. How a word is used is >> > very important. The word in question is used by evolutionists and not a >> > word that is used in a positive way by the advocates of creation >> > science. >> > >> >> Why do you keep calling creation a science when it isn't science. It's >> magical beliefs based on ancient scrolls. There is no evidence for a >> magical mystical fantastical creation. > > It's magical to believe that life could evolve from non-life. No it isn't. When the conditions were right, life started. Nothing magical or fantastical about it. If it didn't start here it started somewhere else and came here to earth. But to believe a magical killer god grabbed a handful of soil and turned it into a living human being is simply absurd, simply "magic." No longer taken seriously by the educated and intelligent people among us.
From: Olrik on 14 Jul 2010 18:21 Le 2010-07-14 18:02, Jason a �crit : > In article<UoqdnbFKMZQ5tKPRnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 7/13/2010 11:18 PM, Jason wrote: >>> In article<i1iujd$3k3$1(a)news.datemas.de>, "Anna DeGanno"<AD(a)invalid.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> "Jason"<Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >>>> news:Jason-1307101243130001(a)67-150-127-253.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... >>>>> >>>>> I am an advocate of creation science. God creating life from non-life >>>>> would be defined as "creation". Abiogenesis is for the most part a term >>>>> that is used by evolutionists to explain how life began on this planet. >>>>> The evolutionists do NOT believe that God played a role. For example, the >>>>> primordial pond theory is a type of abiogenesis. How a word is used is >>>>> very important. The word in question is used by evolutionists and not a >>>>> word that is used in a positive way by the advocates of creation science. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why do you keep calling creation a science when it isn't science. It's >>>> magical beliefs based on ancient scrolls. There is no evidence for a >>>> magical mystical fantastical creation. >>> >>> It's magical to believe that life could evolve from non-life. >> >> >> Do you understand the very thin line that separates life from non-life. >> I suggest that you research the thinness of that line. >> >> It is certainly not magical to believe that common chemical elements >> will combine with each other. It is magical to take something that >> science hasn't yet found a solution and claim it is the province of a >> magical god. A smart man like you needs to read a little history over >> the last 400 years and learn just how small that box for god is getting. >> Folks like you keep shoehorning him into smaller and smaller boxes >> until....POOF..he's gone. > > Have you ever considered that God took the necessary chemical elements and > combined them with each other to make life on this earth? That makes much > more sense to me than to believe that it all happened by chance which is > what most evolutionists do believe. Mankind is far too complex to have > happened as a result of chance. So in order to "explain" that complexity, you imagine a "being" that would be orders of magnitude more complex ? That's illogical and borderline stupid.
From: Ips-Switch on 14 Jul 2010 18:22 "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1307102321560001(a)67-150-120-159.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > Do you honestly believe that life could evolve from non-life? > Yes. Why not? Why do you find it so hard to believe and accept?
From: Anna DeGanno on 14 Jul 2010 18:29
"Joseki" <jabriol2000(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:16f351f1-604f-486b-8f4d-10c0d1ac15df(a)u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com... On Jul 13, 8:01 pm, "Anna DeGanno" <A...(a)invalid.com> wrote: > "Joseki" <jabriol2...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:4f6639b9-4b2d-404d-a1f2-36bba612e3b7(a)t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com... > > What you describe, is called magic. I do not believe in such thing. > Mud...really... > > We're finally getting through to you that no magical "creation" by your > Jehovah ever happened no matter what BS the WTS pumps into your head 5 > times > a week. :) who are "were"? I've never did. But..oh yeah, It doesn't matter of you say so it must be true..eh? -------------- Are you or are you not still a Jehovah's Witness? |