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: Ralph on 19 Jul 2010 17:09 On 7/19/2010 4:50 PM, nuny(a)bid.nes wrote: > On Jul 18, 6:56 pm, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> In article >> <92c62dc8-b13e-46e8-9ebe-b3a1fc09b...(a)c36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob >> >> >> >> T."<b...(a)synapse-cs.com> wrote: >>> On Jul 18, 1:40=A0pm, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>> In article >>>> <ef5793ee-e12a-4893-81f6-e84b68198...(a)p22g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, "Bob >> >>>> T."<b...(a)synapse-cs.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jul 18, 12:48=3DA0pm, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>> But you don't know very much about biology, so why should anyone ca= >>> re >>>>>>> what you think the subject? =3DA0You just now admitted that your so= >>> urces >>>>>>> for the answers to scientific questions are the Bible and your own >>>>>>> imagination - it's no wonder that you're completely wrong! >> >>>>>>> For your information, Jason, you yourself used to be a one celled l= >>> ife >>>>>>> form. =3DA0Since then you have increased billions of times in size = >>> and >>>>>>> dozens of times in intelligence. =3DA0If that happened to you in a = >>> few >>>>>>> short decades, how can you possible claim it's impossible for speci= >>> es >>>>>>> to make that same change in billions of years? =3DA0Oh, right - it >>>>>>> contradicts Genesis, so you know it ain't true. >> >>>>>>> - Bob T >> >>>>>> Bob, >>>>>> Yes, you and I started out as a one celled life form. That's not an i= >>> ssue=3D >>>>> . >>>>>> The issue is that many of the advocates of abiogenesis believe that >>>>>> mankind evolved from a one celled life form. >> >>>>> Actually, that's not "abiogenesis", that's just evolution... and yes, >>>>> everyone who understands biology knows that humans evolved from single- >>>>> celled life-forms. >> >>>> That's not true. The professors that teach at the ICR college understand >>>> biology and even teach biology. They believe that God created life on thi= >>> s >>>> planet and humans did NOT evolve from single celled life forms. >> >>> A belief they had before they studied biology and a belief they kept, >>> for religious reasons, after they studied. >> >>>> Believe it or not, not all college graduates that have taken college biol= >>> ogy classes >>>> don't agree with you. They understand biology as much as evolutionists. >> >>> The are prevented from understanding the parts that conflict with >>> their religion by fear of offending their deity. >> >>> - Bob T >> >>>> - Show quoted text - >> >> I have seen poles indicating that about half the people in America believe >> that God created mankind and life on this planet. The brainwashing by >> biology professors is not working well. > > Why should anyone care what people in Poland think about it? > > > Mark L. Fergerson Thank you Mark, when I was giving Jason his English lesson for the day, I forgot about this little gem.
From: Mark K Bilbo on 19 Jul 2010 18:23 On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:53:19 -0700, 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. Nope. Then again, you must be used to being wrong by now... -- Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ "You believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards, witches, demons, sticks turning into snakes, food falling from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories, and you say that *we* are the ones that need help?" -- Jon Stoll
From: Mark K Bilbo on 19 Jul 2010 18:24 On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:10:24 -0700, Jason wrote: > I disagree. There is lots of evidence in the Bible The "bible" is not evidence. A claim cannot be evidence of itself. -- Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ "If the Bible proves that God exists then comic books prove the existence of Superman."
From: Jason on 19 Jul 2010 18:58 In article <3bmdnSkL-6miMtnRnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On 7/18/2010 11:58 PM, Jason wrote: > > In article<l6c74613lbqrvudrp5sf83hv1cgbe99shu(a)4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <lunch(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:54:20 -0700, Jason(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> alt.atheism: > >> > >>> In article<4c438ffe(a)news.x-privat.org>, "Ips-Switch" > >>> <Ips-Switch(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > >>> > >>>> "Jason"<Jason(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > >>>> news:Jason-1807101340380001(a)67-150-175-229.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > >>>>> That's not true. The professors that teach at the ICR college understand > >>>>> biology and even teach biology. They believe that God created life > > on this > >>>>> planet and humans did NOT evolve from single celled life forms. > > Believe it > >>>>> or not, not all college graduates that have taken college biology classes > >>>>> don't agree with you. They understand biology as much as evolutionists. > >>>> > >>>> Professors of what? Dentistry? French History? If they understand > > biology > >>>> they would know as much as these evolutionists you are so obsessed > > with and > >>>> not be teaching superstition, religion and plain old magic. > >>> > >>> They know about evolution but believe that God created mankind and life on > >>> this planet. Even Darwin believed that God created life on this planet. > >>> > >> He didn't even appear to believe in any gods by the end of his life. > >> > >> You are dishonest. You are a shame to your religion. > >> > >> Luckily for you, the god you keep going on about does not exist. If he > >> did, he would destroy you for being so offensive to him. > > > > Several people have asked me for proof that Darwin believed that a creator > > God was responsible for the creation of mankind. > > > > I found information on a website: > > > > http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/03/expelled-expose.html > > > > I wonder, would a public school teacher in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, be > > allowed to say the following: > > �It is interesting to contemplate � [all the many forms of life on earth] > > � so different from each other, have all been produced by laws acting > > around us. � There is grandeur in this view of life, HAVING BEEN > > ORIGINALLY BREATHED [BY THE CREATOR] INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE; and > > that from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most > > wonderful have been, and are being evolved.� > > Just imagine a public school teacher who says those words: that God > > creates life and places it on the earth in a few forms, and then that life > > evolves according to the physical and natural laws that God put into place > > in the universe. > > Would that be allowed? > > Actually, it should be REQUIRED FOR THE TEACHER TO SAY THAT. > > Why? Because the quote is from: On the Origin of the Species, Chapter XV, > > Recapitulation and Conclusion, By Charles Darwin. > > If you are going to teach Darwin�s theory of evolution in public schools, > > you should teach what Darwin actually wrote about it. > > Michael S. Class Author > > Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame: The History Book with a Message for > > Today�s Young Americans > > > > If you google "breathed into a few forms or into one", you will get lots > > of hits and may be able to find the name of the edition that had these > > words. > > > > One internet website stated that the actual words were: > > > > There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers having > > been orginially breathed into a few forms or into one. > > > > Darwin (in his younger years) planned to become a minister and as a result > > knew lots of information about the Bible. He may have had this scripture > > in mind when he wrote the above quotation: > > > > Genesis 2:7 An the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground and > > breathed life into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living > > soul. > > > > You poor simpleton, that cane from a letter from a reader, not anyone at > the site. If you had read on further you would have found the entire > reading, in context: > > It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with > many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with > various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp > earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so > different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a > manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. > > These laws, taken in the largest sense, being: > > * Growth with Reproduction, > > * Inheritance, which is almost implied by reproduction. > > * Variability from the indirect and direct action of the external > conditions of life, and from use and disuse. > > * A Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life � > > * � and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence > of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. > > Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most > exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the > production of the higher animals, directly follows. > > There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, > having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, > whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of > gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and > most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. > > > Keep pounding the keyboard Jason, you're one of our prime examples of > the type of people who support creationism. Do you recall from the various posts that several people told me or at least strongly implied that I was wrong when I stated that Darwin wrote in his famous book that he believed that God created mankind and life on this planet? It turns out that I was telling the truth and I proved it. Of course, I knew I was telling the truth since I had seen those same words last year. One of the posters told me about those words mentioned above and even I was shocked when I read what Darwin had actually written about his beliefs. It's obvious from his words, that he did not believe that mankind evolved from a single celled life form and he also believed that God created beautiful and wonderful plants and animals.
From: Jason on 19 Jul 2010 19:09
In article <fa53884e-7f19-443e-923a-01519afadc1b(a)s17g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, "nuny(a)bid.nes" <alien8752(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 19, 1:32=A0pm, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article > > <1961631e-f4a2-4098-897b-f1dd9aff8...(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > Devils Advocaat <mankyg...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > On 19 July, 09:33, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <30f9f50b-09a1-4e69-b670-6c805d584...(a)x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > Devils Advocaat <mankyg...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > On 19 July, 04:58, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > In article <l6c74613lbqrvudrp5sf83hv1cgbe99...(a)4ax.com>, Free Lun= > ch > > > > > > > > <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:54:20 -0700, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wr= > ote =3D > > > in > > > > > > > alt.atheism: > > > > > > > > > >In article <4c438...(a)news.x-privat.org>, "Ips-Switch" > > > > > > > ><Ips-Swi...(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> "Jason" <Ja...(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > >>news:Jason-1807101340380001(a)67-150-175-229.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.= > com.=3D > > > .. > > > > > > > >> > That's not true. The professors that teach at the ICR coll= > ege =3D > > > unde=3D3D > > > > > rstand > > > > > > > >> > biology and even teach biology. They believe that God crea= > ted =3D > > > life > > > > > > on this > > > > > > > >> > planet and humans did NOT evolve from single celled life f= > orms=3D > > > . > > > > > > Believe it > > > > > > > >> > or not, not all college graduates that have taken college = > biol=3D > > > ogy =3D3D > > > > > classes > > > > > > > >> > don't agree with you. They understand biology as much as e= > volu=3D > > > tion=3D3D > > > > > ists. > > > > > > > > > >> Professors of what? =3D3DC2=3D3DA0Dentistry? =3D3DC2=3D3DA0F= > rench Histor=3D > > > y? =3D3DC2=3D3DA0If =3D3D > > > > > they understand > > > > > > biology > > > > > > > >> they would know as much as these evolutionists you are so ob= > sess=3D > > > ed > > > > > > with and > > > > > > > >> not be teaching superstition, religion and plain old magic. > > > > > > > > > >They know about evolution but believe that God created mankind= > and=3D > > > =A0lif=3D3D > > > > > e on > > > > > > > >this planet. Even Darwin believed that God created life on thi= > s pl=3D > > > anet=3D3D > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > He didn't even appear to believe in any gods by the end of his = > life=3D > > > . > > > > > > > > > You are dishonest. You are a shame to your religion. > > > > > > > > > Luckily for you, the god you keep going on about does not exist= > . If=3D > > > =A0he > > > > > > > did, he would destroy you for being so offensive to him. > > > > > > > > Several people have asked me for proof that Darwin believed that = > a cr=3D > > > eato=3D3D > > > > > r > > > > > > God was responsible for the creation of mankind. > > > > > > > > I found information on a website: > > > > > > > >http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/03/expelled-expose.html > > > > > > > > I wonder, would a public school teacher in Harrisburg, Pennsylvan= > ia, =3D > > > be > > > > > > allowed to say the following: > > > > > > =3D3DC2=3D3DB3It is interesting to contemplate =3D3DC5=3D3DA0 [al= > l the many f=3D > > > orms of life=3D3D > > > > > =3DA0on earth] > > > > > > =3D3DC5=3D3DA0 so different from each other, have all been produc= > ed by la=3D > > > ws actin=3D3D > > > > > g > > > > > > around us. =3D3DC5=3D3DA0 There is grandeur in this view of life,= > HAVING =3D > > > BEEN > > > > > > ORIGINALLY BREATHED [BY THE CREATOR] INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE= > ; an=3D > > > d > > > > > > that from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and= > mos=3D > > > t > > > > > > wonderful have been, and are being evolved.=3D3DC2=3D3DB2 > > > > > > Just imagine a public school teacher who says those words: that G= > od > > > > > > creates life and places it on the earth in a few forms, and then = > that=3D > > > =A0lif=3D3D > > > > > e > > > > > > evolves according to the physical and natural laws that God put i= > nto =3D > > > plac=3D3D > > > > > e > > > > > > in the universe. > > > > > > Would that be allowed? > > > > > > Actually, it should be REQUIRED FOR THE TEACHER TO SAY THAT. > > > > > > Why? Because the quote is from: On the Origin of the Species, Cha= > pter=3D > > > =A0XV, > > > > > > Recapitulation and Conclusion, By Charles Darwin. > > > > > > If you are going to teach Darwin=3D3DC2=3D3DB9s theory of evoluti= > on in pu=3D > > > blic sch=3D3D > > > > > ools, > > > > > > you should teach what Darwin actually wrote about it. > > > > > > Michael S. Class Author > > > > > > Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame: The History Book with a Mess= > age =3D > > > for > > > > > > Today=3D3DC2=3D3DB9s Young Americans > > > > > > > > If you google "breathed into a few forms or into one", you will g= > et l=3D > > > ots > > > > > > of hits and may be able to find the name of the edition that had = > thes=3D > > > e > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > > One internet website stated that the actual words were: > > > > > > > > There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers h= > avin=3D > > > g > > > > > > been orginially breathed into a few forms or into one. > > > > > > > > Darwin (in his younger years) planned to become a minister and as= > a r=3D > > > esul=3D3D > > > > > t > > > > > > knew lots of information about the Bible. He may have had this sc= > ript=3D > > > ure > > > > > > in mind when he wrote the above quotation: > > > > > > > > Genesis 2:7 =3D3DC2=3D3DA0An the Lord God formed man out of the d= > ust of t=3D > > > he groun=3D3D > > > > > d and > > > > > > breathed life into his nostrils the breath of life and man became= > a l=3D > > > ivin=3D3D > > > > > g > > > > > > soul. > > > > > > > Unlikely conclusion > > > > > > Why do you believe that Darwin made this statement: > > > > > > "There is grandeur in this view of life, HAVING BEEN > > > > ORIGINALLY BREATHED [BY THE CREATOR] INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE; an= > d > > > > that from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and mos= > t > > > > wonderful have been, and are being evolved." > > > > > > I define it to mean that Darwin believed God breathed life into Adam = > and > > > > perhaps also into Eve and that God made an endless number of plants a= > nd > > > > animals that were beautiful and wonderful. Those plants and animals l= > ater > > > > evolved. > > > > > That is your personal interpretation of that statement, but it doesn't > > > follow from the context in which it is written. > > > > > Darwin's view was that God created a few simple organisms at the > > > beginning of life and that the process he called natural selection > > > resulted in the rich diversity of life as he saw it in the world. > > > > > Which is a completely different angle to the one you are trying to put > > > on it. > > > > You interpret your way and I'll interpret my way. His language is archaic > > and it's difficult for anyone to figure out exactly what he meant. > > However, "having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one" i= > s > > easy to understand. I believe "endless forms" does NOT mean "a few simple > > organisms". Look up the the word "endless" in your dictionary. My > > dictionary defines ENDLESS as "extremely numerous". In other words, Darwi= > n > > believes that God created endless forms--not a few forms. Organisms are > > NOT beautiful and wonderful. That's why I believe he was referring to > > beautiful and wonderful plants and animals. > > What do you think "organisms" means? > > > Mark L. Fergerson I looked it up and generally refers to animals. I don't whether or not it refers to single or multi-celled life forms such as protozoan. However, Darwin did NOT use the term organisms. He used the term "forms". That could mean both plants and animals. |