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: Free Lunch on 23 Jul 2010 18:17 On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:32:32 -0700, Jason(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote in alt.talk.creationism: >In article ><1961631e-f4a2-4098-897b-f1dd9aff8030(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, >Devils Advocaat <mankygoat(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 19 July, 09:33, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: .... >> > 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; and >> > that from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most >> > 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 and >> > animals that were beautiful and wonderful. Those plants and animals later >> > 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. Anyway, it does not matter at all since there isn't a shred of evidence for any gods doing anything. Religious doctrines need to be fixed so they are not contrary to reality. You teach religious doctrines that are demonstrably false, doctrines that have been shown to you to be false. You ignore that you are wrong. Why don't you repent? >However, "having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one" is >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, Darwin >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. You appear to be looking at >his actual statement with evolution colored glasses. You have to keep in >mind that Darwin once considered becoming a minister and as a result knew >about the Bible and he especially knew about the the first 3 chapters of >Genesis. It very possible that he was putting this scripture in his own >words: > >Genesis 2:7 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. >
From: Ralph on 23 Jul 2010 19:06 On 7/23/2010 5:17 PM, Jason wrote: > In article<-cSdnZrItZ0RZdTRnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 7/23/2010 3:33 PM, Jason wrote: >>>> Either you're blatantly lying, or this is yet another example of the >>>> depth and breadth of your ignorance. Evolutionists have ideas about >>>> the subject based on available evidence (remember I mentioned that the >>>> theory of evolution has evolved since Darwin?), but are quite willing >>>> to drop them when new evidence falsifying those ideas becomes >>>> available. >>>> >>>> That's the difference between science and religion. >>>> >>>> Religionists will NEVER drop their beliefs, despite the lack of >>>> evidence for them, or the availability of evidence against them. It's >>>> why you like to stifle and/or kill opponents of your ideas. >>>> >>>>> not intelligent enough to realize that God created life on this planet. >>>> >>>> What your Bible says is that god "breathed" life into a pile of dust >>>> shaped like a man, which then became living. >>>> >>>> Are you seriously suggesting that is an accurate description of an >>>> actual event? >>>> >>>> Do you seriously believe that the transfer of air carries something >>>> that imbues life into inanimate matter? >>>> >>>> What is the nature of that "something"? >>>> >>>> Also, "belief" in something without any evidence to substantiate it >>>> is *not* a function of intelligence. You're the one that keeps saying >>>> you "don't know" what various things brought up in this thread mean, >>>> yet you claim "special knowledge" and/or "wisdom" based on your >>>> *belief* that your Bible is correct. >>>> >>>> The word you wanted is "faith". >>>> >>>>> They think they are wise but they became fools. Thank goodness, that >>>>> Darwin was intelligent enough to realize that God created life on this >>>>> planet. Darwin was not a fool. >>>> >>>> Again that's *your* interpretation of something that doesn't need >>>> interpreting. Besides, your interpretation is completely *against* >>>> what the Bible says; it leaves *no room* for evolution because >>>> according to it, every living thing produces offspring "like from >>>> like". >>>> >>>> Your interpretation is heresy. >>>> >>>> >>>> Mark L. Fergerson >>> >>> The creation of mankind was a miracle. How God went about creating life on >>> this earth is not mentioned in any great detail in the Bible. >> >> >> Wonder why? I would have loved to hear how he made material things >> follow his orders. Little quarks and electrons just bopping around >> making stars and galaxies and all kinds of wonders. How did he do that, >> Jason? >> >> >> >>> God knows >>> 1000% more about DNA, etc than any scientist living today. >> >> >> Why not 10^10,000 more. Why stop at a thousand? >> >> >> >>> God used his >>> knowledge of science and biology to create life on this planet. >> >> >> Where did he get his degree? >> >> >> >>> Darwin >>> believed that God breathed life into Adam and perhaps also breathed life >>> into Eve. He believed that God created an endless number of plants and >>> animals. >> >> >> >> That's a god damn lie and you know it! >> >> >>> After the creation of mankind, plants and animals is when >>> evolution kicked in. >> >> >> Good, you acknowledge evolution occurred. >> >> >>> I believe the reason Darwin did not discuss theories >>> related to abiogenesis in his book is because he believed God created >>> mankind and an endless number of beautiful and wonderful plants and >>> animals. The plants and animals on the earth today have as ancestors the >>> plants and animals that God created. This is a statement from Darwin's >>> famous book: >> >> >> What you believe and what actually occurred are two different things and >> you are clueless about both of them. >> >> >> >>> "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." >>> � Charles Darwin >> >> >> Damn Jason, I don't see where he mentions "Gawd". Perhaps you cam point >> this out to me. > > Compare the above statement to Genesis 2:7 and the above statement by > Darwin makes perfect sense. Keep in mind that Darwin was a Christian > during the younger days of his life and knew all about the Bible--esp. the > first several chapters of Genesis. Who else but God can breath life into > people. If Darwin was NOT discussing God breathing life into Adam and > perhaps also into Eve--what was he discussing? I debated this point with you a few days ago and you just keep blowing right on by it. Go back and read what I said!
From: Ralph on 23 Jul 2010 19:09 On 7/23/2010 5:09 PM, Jason wrote: >>> Are you saying that Darwin was not interested in selling copies of his >>> books in America? In the 1800 and early 1900's--a majority of people in >>> Europe were Christians. Darwin was a Christian during the early years of >>> his life. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> Jason, it doesn't make any difference what Darwin's religion was. He >> still supported his theory. If Darwin was a Christian why did Christians >> make up so many lies about his conversion on his death bed. > > Darwin was a Christian during the early years of his life. He did NOT > discuss theories of abiogenesis in any of his books. Have you wondered > about that? I have and the answer is simple. He believed that God created > mankind and a countless number of beautiful and wonderful plants and > animals. After mankind, plants and animals were created is when evolution > kicked in. > > Charles Darwin stated: > > "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." > > Compare his statement to Genesis 2:7 and you will know what Darwin meant > when he stated "breathed into a few forms [Adam and Eve] or into one > [Adam]. > > The Bible does NOT say that God breathed life into Eve but Darwin believed > that it may have happened that way. It could have happened that way--it > makes sense. It is a good thing that lairs like you lie about folks who are dead, that way you don't have to confront them with your cockamamie ideas.
From: Smiler. on 23 Jul 2010 20:45 Jason wrote: >>> Are you saying that Darwin was not interested in selling copies of >>> his books in America? In the 1800 and early 1900's--a majority of >>> people in Europe were Christians. Darwin was a Christian during the >>> early years of his life. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> Jason, it doesn't make any difference what Darwin's religion was. He >> still supported his theory. If Darwin was a Christian why did >> Christians make up so many lies about his conversion on his death >> bed. > > Darwin was a Christian during the early years of his life. He did NOT > discuss theories of abiogenesis in any of his books. Have you wondered > about that? I have and the answer is simple. He believed that God > created mankind and a countless number of beautiful and wonderful > plants and animals. After mankind, plants and animals were created is > when evolution kicked in. > Nope. He was, unlike you, intelligent enough not to write about things he didn't understand. > Charles Darwin stated: > > "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." > > Compare his statement to Genesis 2:7 and you will know what Darwin > meant when he stated "breathed into a few forms [Adam and Eve] or > into one [Adam]. > Why should I compare the scientific writing of Darwin to a book of fairy tales, myths, fables, contradictions and downright lies? > The Bible does NOT say that God breathed life into Eve So what? I don't give a FF what the wholly babble says or doesn't say. > but Darwin > believed that it may have happened that way. So you're able to read the minds of the dead, as well as the living! Where did you get your degree in mindreading? > It could have happened > that way--it makes sense. Only to lying christian believers like you. -- Smiler The godless one. a.a.# 2279 All gods are bespoke. They're all made to perfectly fit the prejudices of their believers.
From: Jason on 23 Jul 2010 23:11
In article <mrydnReEnvIdvdfRnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On 7/23/2010 5:17 PM, Jason wrote: > > In article<-cSdnZrItZ0RZdTRnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> On 7/23/2010 3:33 PM, Jason wrote: > >>>> Either you're blatantly lying, or this is yet another example of the > >>>> depth and breadth of your ignorance. Evolutionists have ideas about > >>>> the subject based on available evidence (remember I mentioned that the > >>>> theory of evolution has evolved since Darwin?), but are quite willing > >>>> to drop them when new evidence falsifying those ideas becomes > >>>> available. > >>>> > >>>> That's the difference between science and religion. > >>>> > >>>> Religionists will NEVER drop their beliefs, despite the lack of > >>>> evidence for them, or the availability of evidence against them. It's > >>>> why you like to stifle and/or kill opponents of your ideas. > >>>> > >>>>> not intelligent enough to realize that God created life on this planet. > >>>> > >>>> What your Bible says is that god "breathed" life into a pile of dust > >>>> shaped like a man, which then became living. > >>>> > >>>> Are you seriously suggesting that is an accurate description of an > >>>> actual event? > >>>> > >>>> Do you seriously believe that the transfer of air carries something > >>>> that imbues life into inanimate matter? > >>>> > >>>> What is the nature of that "something"? > >>>> > >>>> Also, "belief" in something without any evidence to substantiate it > >>>> is *not* a function of intelligence. You're the one that keeps saying > >>>> you "don't know" what various things brought up in this thread mean, > >>>> yet you claim "special knowledge" and/or "wisdom" based on your > >>>> *belief* that your Bible is correct. > >>>> > >>>> The word you wanted is "faith". > >>>> > >>>>> They think they are wise but they became fools. Thank goodness, that > >>>>> Darwin was intelligent enough to realize that God created life on this > >>>>> planet. Darwin was not a fool. > >>>> > >>>> Again that's *your* interpretation of something that doesn't need > >>>> interpreting. Besides, your interpretation is completely *against* > >>>> what the Bible says; it leaves *no room* for evolution because > >>>> according to it, every living thing produces offspring "like from > >>>> like". > >>>> > >>>> Your interpretation is heresy. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Mark L. Fergerson > >>> > >>> The creation of mankind was a miracle. How God went about creating life on > >>> this earth is not mentioned in any great detail in the Bible. > >> > >> > >> Wonder why? I would have loved to hear how he made material things > >> follow his orders. Little quarks and electrons just bopping around > >> making stars and galaxies and all kinds of wonders. How did he do that, > >> Jason? > >> > >> > >> > >>> God knows > >>> 1000% more about DNA, etc than any scientist living today. > >> > >> > >> Why not 10^10,000 more. Why stop at a thousand? > >> > >> > >> > >>> God used his > >>> knowledge of science and biology to create life on this planet. > >> > >> > >> Where did he get his degree? > >> > >> > >> > >>> Darwin > >>> believed that God breathed life into Adam and perhaps also breathed life > >>> into Eve. He believed that God created an endless number of plants and > >>> animals. > >> > >> > >> > >> That's a god damn lie and you know it! > >> > >> > >>> After the creation of mankind, plants and animals is when > >>> evolution kicked in. > >> > >> > >> Good, you acknowledge evolution occurred. > >> > >> > >>> I believe the reason Darwin did not discuss theories > >>> related to abiogenesis in his book is because he believed God created > >>> mankind and an endless number of beautiful and wonderful plants and > >>> animals. The plants and animals on the earth today have as ancestors the > >>> plants and animals that God created. This is a statement from Darwin's > >>> famous book: > >> > >> > >> What you believe and what actually occurred are two different things and > >> you are clueless about both of them. > >> > >> > >> > >>> "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." > >>> � Charles Darwin > >> > >> > >> Damn Jason, I don't see where he mentions "Gawd". Perhaps you cam point > >> this out to me. > > > > Compare the above statement to Genesis 2:7 and the above statement by > > Darwin makes perfect sense. Keep in mind that Darwin was a Christian > > during the younger days of his life and knew all about the Bible--esp. the > > first several chapters of Genesis. Who else but God can breath life into > > people. If Darwin was NOT discussing God breathing life into Adam and > > perhaps also into Eve--what was he discussing? > > > I debated this point with you a few days ago and you just keep blowing > right on by it. Go back and read what I said! I will ask once again--If Darwin was NOT discussing God breathing life into Adam and perhaps also into Eve--what was he discussing. I delete posts that I have already read. |