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 15 Jul 2010 14:00 In article <i1na3e$psj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Parish *~" <Parish(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-1407101757060001(a)66-53-220-250.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > > I believe that it is illogical to believe that mankind could have come > > about by chance. > > > > Yet you believe a magical invisible supernatural "god" poofed everything > into being despite the evidence against such a happening? That's logical to > you? You used the "magical" in the above post. In addition to God's other duties, God is a scientist that is 1000 times smarter than Einstein or Hocking (spelling??). He created DNA. He created life on this earth. He created the earth and the solar system. He created everything. There was nothing magical about it. It has taken experts dozens of years to map the chromosomes. God designed the chromosomes--that's much more difficult than mapping the chromosomes. It's hard for me to figure out why evolutionists can actually believe the chromosomes came about by chance. However, they do beieve it.
From: Bob T. on 15 Jul 2010 14:08 On Jul 15, 11:00 am, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <i1na3e$ps...(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Parish *~" > > <Par...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > > "Jason" <Ja...(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-1407101757060001(a)66-53-220-250.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > > I believe that it is illogical to believe that mankind could have come > > > about by chance. > > > Yet you believe a magical invisible supernatural "god" poofed everything > > into being despite the evidence against such a happening? That's logical to > > you? > > You used the "magical" in the above post. In addition to God's other > duties, God is a scientist that is 1000 times smarter than Einstein or > Hocking (spelling??). He created DNA. He created life on this earth. He > created the earth and the solar system. He created everything. What a quaint little belief system you have. > There was nothing magical about it. It has taken experts dozens of years to map the > chromosomes. God designed the chromosomes--that's much more difficult than > mapping the chromosomes. It's hard for me to figure out why evolutionists > can actually believe the chromosomes came about by chance. However, they > do beieve it. Just like we believe that the grains of sand on a beach are sorted "by chance". - Bob T
From: Ralph on 15 Jul 2010 14:49 On 7/15/2010 2:00 PM, Jason wrote: > In article<i1na3e$psj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Parish *~" > <Parish(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> "Jason"<Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-1407101757060001(a)66-53-220-250.stkn.mdsg-pacwest.com... >>> >>> I believe that it is illogical to believe that mankind could have come >>> about by chance. >>> >> >> Yet you believe a magical invisible supernatural "god" poofed everything >> into being despite the evidence against such a happening? That's logical to >> you? > > You used the "magical" in the above post. In addition to God's other > duties, God is a scientist that is 1000 times smarter than Einstein or > Hocking (spelling??). He created DNA. He created life on this earth. He > created the earth and the solar system. He created everything. There was > nothing magical about it. It has taken experts dozens of years to map the > chromosomes. God designed the chromosomes--that's much more difficult than > mapping the chromosomes. It's hard for me to figure out why evolutionists > can actually believe the chromosomes came about by chance. However, they > do beieve it. Said one of the most incredulous fools on the planet.
From: Ralph on 15 Jul 2010 14:51 On 7/15/2010 1:48 PM, Jason wrote: > In article > <f57b52d4-2f1c-4835-a1a8-9dd20c643e07(a)q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, > Joseki<jabriol2000(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 15, 7:21=A0am, Tim Miller<replytonewsgr...(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >>> Joseki wrote: >>>> On Jul 15, 4:36 am, "Syd M."<pdwrigh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jul 15, 1:53 am, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> >>>>>> In article<8a7c6vF3f4...(a)mid.individual.net>, Mark K Bilbo >>>>>> <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:02:00 -0700, Jason wrote: >>>>>>>> Have you ever considered that God took the necessary chemical eleme= >> nts >>>>>>>> and combined them with each other to make life on this earth? >>>>>>> That would be abiogenesis. >>>>>> abiogenesis usually means that it happened by chance. >>>>> No. >>> >>>>> PDW >>> >>>> http://www.answers.com/topic/abiogenesis >>> >>>> The supposed development of living organisms from nonliving matter. >>>> Also called autogenesis, spontaneous generation. >>> >>>> a hypothetical organic phenomenon by which living organisms are >>>> created from nonliving matter >>>> wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn >>>> In the natural sciences, abiogenesis (, ) or biopoesis is the theory >>>> of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. ... >>>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis >>>> The supposed origination of living organisms from lifeless matter; >>>> such genesis as does not involve the action of living parents; >>>> spontaneous generation >>>> en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abiogenesis >>>> abiogenic - Of chemicals, not produced by means of biochemical >>>> activity of organisms while alive >>>> en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abiogenic >>>> abiogenetical - Variation of abiogenetic >>>> en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abiogenetical >>>> the hypothetical process where life spontaneously formed from organic >>>> material that had arisen from inorganic material. >>>> www.carm.org/evolution-terminology >>>> An ancient belief that life can emerge from inanimate matter. >>>> search.barnesandnoble.com/Students-Dictionary-for-Biblical-and- >>>> Theological-Studies/F-B-Huey/e/9780310459514 >>>> (Greek a-bio-genesis, "non biological origins") is the formation of >>>> life from non-living matter. Today the term is primarily used to refer >>>> to the chemical origin of life, such as from a 'primordial soup' or in >>>> the vicinity of hydrothermal vents, and most probably through a number >>>> of intermediate ... >>>> wiki.smashits.com/wikipedia/Abiogenesis >>> >>>> I guess major dictionaries including the one used in Princeton >>>> disagrees with the lot of you. >>> >>> I guess English isn't a language you're familiar with. None of those >>> definitions even MENTION the words "by chance" or "random". >> >> I am actually very Familiar with English and five other languages. >> >> >> Here is what the denizen of talk.Origins say: >> http://creationwiki.org/(Talk.Origins)_Even_the_simplest_life_is_incredibly= >> _complex >> >> 3. Nobody claims the first life arose by chance. >> >> However, in a naturalistic model, it does come down to chance =97 the >> chance the Big Bang produced the right type of universe, the chance of >> sufficient raw material being on a planet in the right orbit, the >> chance of getting the right molecules in sufficient concentrations for >> a sufficient number of trials, and so on. >> Then there is the random nature of molecular motion, which means that >> there is chance involved in getting specific molecules together to >> form the next step before they break down. >> The only way to eliminate chance is for life to have originated by >> means of an intelligent agent (God), which is the exact opposite of a >> naturalistic origin. >> So whether acknowledged or not, a naturalistic origin of life >> ultimately requires chance, and the only real question is: Are the >> odds high enough for it to be statistically possible? > > Great points Here we go with the odds again. What are the odds that a god who is involved personally with everything on this paltry earth created the entire universe just for the fun of it. Why, I'll bet that they would be incalculable.
From: Ralph on 15 Jul 2010 14:52
On 7/15/2010 1:44 PM, Jason wrote: > In article<z5mdnamSaLwkqaLRnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 7/15/2010 1:53 AM, Jason wrote: >>> In article<8a7c6vF3f4U30(a)mid.individual.net>, Mark K Bilbo >>> <gmail(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:02:00 -0700, Jason wrote: >>>> >>>>> Have you ever considered that God took the necessary chemical elements >>>>> and combined them with each other to make life on this earth? >>>> >>>> That would be abiogenesis. >>> >>> abiogenesis usually means that it happened by chance. >> >> >> Really? How did you develop that idea? > > Most evolutionists use the term and I rarely see the term used in a > positive way in the ICR newsletter. How a word is used is just important > as how the word is usually defined. What God done is referred to as > "creation" and not "abiogenesis" as far as ICR is concerned. > jason > No Jason, how did you develop the idea that abiogenesis was development by chance? |