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: Mark K Bilbo on 13 Jul 2010 10:20 On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:58:02 -0700, Joseki wrote: > On Jul 12, 11:32 pm, Mark K Bilbo <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: >> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:15:12 -0700, Joseki wrote: >> > Nope I didn't say that. I said Life like matter and energy can't be >> > created just transformed. >> >> Wouldn't that end the case for any creation at all? >> >> -- >> Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic >> Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ >> "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys >> on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like >> Shakespeare!" >> >> -- Blair Houghton > > No. Dr. Craig Venter Created a synthetic Cell from known organic > material. This cell has no parents. It is alive by definition. If its components were not alive, that's abiogenesis. By, ahem, definition... -- Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ "It's Christmas, for goodness sake. Think about the baby Jesus... up in that tower, letting his hair down... so that the three wise men can climb up and spin the dradel and see if there are six more weeks of winter." -- Karen Walker
From: Joseki on 13 Jul 2010 10:54 On Jul 13, 9:06 am, martin <use...(a)etiqa.co.uk> wrote: > On 13/07/2010 13:28, Joseki wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 8:20 am, martin<use...(a)etiqa.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 13/07/2010 13:09, Joseki wrote: > > >>> Have you seen otherwise? Life from life can be demonstrated with the > >>> scientific method. With Probability, that would be a 1. seen it has > >>> been done and is still being done... But Abiogenesis just doesn't fit > >>> the math nor Scientific method. > > >> Yet we're here. Ergo the probability of life arising from non-life is > >> exactly 1 > > >>>> Mark L. Fergerson > > > No it is not. A creationist, which I am not, can say a an old man > > critter snap us into being and then reply: "Yet we're here. Ergo the > > probability of life arising from Magic is exactly 1. > > That doesn't matter, even a creationist reading the most strict version > of the bible has to accept abiogenesis. It's in black and white. God > picked up a handful of mud and breathed life into it. If that doesn't > qualify nothing will. > > It doesn't. read the definition for abiogenesis. Very educational. > > > There is nothing tangible with creation and nothing tangible with > > abiogenesis. > > > I don't believe in Magic. I do believe in Clarke's third law.
From: Joseki on 13 Jul 2010 10:56 On Jul 13, 10:20 am, Mark K Bilbo <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:58:02 -0700, Joseki wrote: > > On Jul 12, 11:32 pm, Mark K Bilbo <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:15:12 -0700, Joseki wrote: > >> > Nope I didn't say that. I said Life like matter and energy can't be > >> > created just transformed. > > >> Wouldn't that end the case for any creation at all? > > >> -- > >> Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic > >> Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys > >> on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like > >> Shakespeare!" > > >> -- Blair Houghton > > > No. Dr. Craig Venter Created a synthetic Cell from known organic > > material. This cell has no parents. It is alive by definition. > > If its components were not alive, that's abiogenesis. > > By, ahem, definition... > > -- > Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 > EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion > ------------------------------------------------------------ > "It's Christmas, for goodness sake. Think about the baby > Jesus... up in that tower, letting his hair down... > so that the three wise men can climb up and spin the dradel > and see if there are six more weeks of winter." > > -- Karen Walker Not according to the hounds of TO http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/
From: Joseki on 13 Jul 2010 10:57 On Jul 13, 9:06 am, martin <use...(a)etiqa.co.uk> wrote: > On 13/07/2010 13:28, Joseki wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 8:20 am, martin<use...(a)etiqa.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 13/07/2010 13:09, Joseki wrote: > > >>> Have you seen otherwise? Life from life can be demonstrated with the > >>> scientific method. With Probability, that would be a 1. seen it has > >>> been done and is still being done... But Abiogenesis just doesn't fit > >>> the math nor Scientific method. > > >> Yet we're here. Ergo the probability of life arising from non-life is > >> exactly 1 > > >>>> Mark L. Fergerson > > > No it is not. A creationist, which I am not, can say a an old man > > critter snap us into being and then reply: "Yet we're here. Ergo the > > probability of life arising from Magic is exactly 1. > > That doesn't matter, even a creationist reading the most strict version > of the bible has to accept abiogenesis. It's in black and white. God > picked up a handful of mud and breathed life into it. If that doesn't > qualify nothing will. > > > http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/
From: Joseki on 13 Jul 2010 10:58
On Jul 13, 10:20 am, Mark K Bilbo <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:58:02 -0700, Joseki wrote: > > On Jul 12, 11:32 pm, Mark K Bilbo <gm...(a)com.mkbilbo> wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:15:12 -0700, Joseki wrote: > >> > Nope I didn't say that. I said Life like matter and energy can't be > >> > created just transformed. > > >> Wouldn't that end the case for any creation at all? > > >> -- > >> Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic > >> Subversion ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys > >> on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like > >> Shakespeare!" > > >> -- Blair Houghton > > > No. Dr. Craig Venter Created a synthetic Cell from known organic > > material. This cell has no parents. It is alive by definition. > > If its components were not alive, that's abiogenesis. > > By, ahem, definition... > > http://www.iscid.org/encyclopedia/Abiogenesis |