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 17:21 In article <SoidnSE-D7YixaLRnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > 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. I never stated that God created the entire universe just for the fun of it.
From: Parish *~ on 15 Jul 2010 17:56 "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1507101100000001(a)67-150-122-171.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > In article <i1na3e$psj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Parish *~" > <Parish(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> 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??). If God was a scientist there would be no genetic defects in man and animals, no disease and no parasites. Your "god" totally screwed up creation if there indeed was a magical poofed "creation." >He created DNA. He created life on this earth. And he did a terrible job as anyone can see. You keep making these baseless claims and fail to provide us with even one small shred of scientific evidence this god exists or ever existed. Why is that? He > created the earth and the solar system. He created everything. There was > nothing magical about it. Nothing magical about everything suddenly poofing into existence? What would you call it? It's certainly not a scientific claim. It has taken experts dozens of years to map the > chromosomes. God designed the chromosomes--that's much more difficult than > mapping the chromosomes. Where is your scientific evidence for this and your explanation for why there are so many DNA mistakes made by living creatures (cells) = cancer for one. Don't you agree if a real god created DNA it wouldn't have all the issues it does? Of course you agree. :) Your god really messed up. It's hard for me to figure out why evolutionists > can actually believe the chromosomes came about by chance. However, they > do beieve it. It's hard for me to figure out why believers can actually believe a magical god from *nowhere* suddenly created faulty chromosomes....... however the less intelligent, less educated believers do believe it. A real god wouldn't have messed it up. There would be no genetic mistakes, no genetic diseases etc. -- The Parrish *~, American-American-American. * * * * * * "The Mass is the most perfect form of making money." * * * * * * * *
From: Anna DeGanno on 15 Jul 2010 18:19 "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1507101421280001(a)66-53-215-33.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > In article <SoidnSE-D7YixaLRnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> 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. > > I never stated that God created the entire universe just for the fun of > it. What other reason would a great all powerful and all knowing god have. > >
From: Jason on 15 Jul 2010 20:02 In article <i1o1h3$eib$1(a)news.datemas.de>, "Anna DeGanno" <AD(a)invalid.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-1507101421280001(a)66-53-215-33.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > In article <SoidnSE-D7YixaLRnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Here we go with the odds again. What are the odds that a god who is > >> involved personally with everything on this paltry earth created the > >> entire universe just for the fun of it. Why, I'll bet that they would be > >> incalculable. > > > > I never stated that God created the entire universe just for the fun of > > it. > > What other reason would a great all powerful and all knowing god have. > > > > > For fellowship with mankind.
From: Olrik on 16 Jul 2010 00:09
Le 2010-07-15 14:00, Jason a �crit : > In article<i1na3e$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. It's nearly impossible not to call Loki on that Jason... |