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 24 Jul 2010 13:25 On 7/24/2010 11:56 AM, Jason wrote: > In article<uqydnf6s4MGAddfRnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph > <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 7/23/2010 11:28 PM, Jason wrote: >>> In article<mrydnRaEnvKJvNfRnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Ralph >>> <mmman_90(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> 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. >>> >>> I don't know what you mean. I looked up lair in my dictionary and it >>> states that a lair is "the resting place of a wild animal". >>> >>> >> >> >> >> Aw Jason, you're certainly not the person to start a spelling, typo or >> grammar war but since you did I'll finish it. Good luck, you'll need >> it:-))))). > > I was making a point. It's easy to make spelling errors, typo errors and > grammar errors in newsgroup posts. Most people that post in newsgroups > don't bother to edit their posts. I do not edit or proofread my posts. > Some people that are excellent writers never make errors. I have never > been an excellent writer. I have had to spend lots of time editing college > papers. While I was working on my Master's Degree, I hired a local former > secretary to edit and type all of my college papers. I wrote the papers > and she cleaned up the spelling, typos and grammar. I read in an article > in a magazine that many of the people that are working on Ph.D. degrees > hire writing experts to write their entire theses for them. They do > nothing but provide the subject. > jason I don't care about that bullshit, you just keep on your toes.
From: Ralph on 24 Jul 2010 13:25 On 7/23/2010 11:11 PM, Jason wrote: > 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. Darwin was exceedingly concerned about the reception that 'Origin' would receive by the public. In order to alleviate some of those fears Darwin used language that the religious people of that day knew. That is why you don't see Darwin use the word 'God' and you will never see it used by him. Now, in that exceedingly simple mind of yours, can you understand that?
From: Bob T. on 24 Jul 2010 13:31 On Jul 24, 9:40 am, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > You failed to answer the above question. > > > Well, I answered it - Darwin was obviously talking about the very > > earliest, microscopic life forms. To believe otherwise requires > > incredible obtuseness. Darwin's own theory proposed that humans > > evolved from pre-human ancestors - even if _you_ believe the Adam & > > Eve myth, Darwin clearly did not. > > > Try really hard not to delete this fact from your brain, Jason. > > > - Bob T > > What does that have to do with Darwin's "breathing" comment? If God was > NOT discussing God breathing life into Adam and perhaps also Eve--what was > he discussing? Wow... you deleted that from your brain even faster than usual. As I said, just one post ago: Darwin was obviously talking about the very earliest, microscopic life forms. - Bob T > > Darwin's statement: > > "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."
From: Free Lunch on 24 Jul 2010 13:39 On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 09:23:04 -0700, Jason(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote in alt.talk.creationism: > >> >> >>> "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. >> >> >> By "already read", I take it you mean "contain things I don't wanna >> see"... > >You failed to answer the above question. > He was talking about the beginning of life on earth. It has absolutely nothing to do with humans. You have been told that repeatedly, but you refuse to admit that you are teaching a false doctrine and cannot acknowledge that your dogma has been proven false by the scientific evidence.
From: Free Lunch on 24 Jul 2010 13:40
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 09:40:28 -0700, Jason(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote in alt.talk.creationism: > > >> > You failed to answer the above question. >> >> Well, I answered it - Darwin was obviously talking about the very >> earliest, microscopic life forms. To believe otherwise requires >> incredible obtuseness. Darwin's own theory proposed that humans >> evolved from pre-human ancestors - even if _you_ believe the Adam & >> Eve myth, Darwin clearly did not. >> >> Try really hard not to delete this fact from your brain, Jason. >> >> - Bob T > >What does that have to do with Darwin's "breathing" comment? If God was >NOT discussing God breathing life into Adam and perhaps also Eve--what was >he discussing? > >Darwin's statement: > >"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." Metaphores are too hard for you to comprehend so you reify them. |