What do real scientist say about Abiogenesis
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 401.7: The Pairing of P(A-->A ' ) > = P(A) with P(A ' --> A) < = P(A ' ) or Vice Versa
Next: Painus Is Buying AA A New Laptop !
From: Andrew on 14 Jul 2010 10:47 <skyeyes9(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > And by the way: please demonstrate why life - which we know is not an > either/or thing - cannot arise from ordinary chemical processes, given > the right conditions? No problem ----> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/chemical-cr.htm
From: Devils Advocaat on 14 Jul 2010 11:29 On 14 July, 15:47, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...(a)usa.net> wrote: > <skyey...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > And by the way: please demonstrate why life - which we know is not an > > either/or thing - cannot arise from ordinary chemical processes, given > > the right conditions? > > No problem ---->http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/chemical-cr.htm Have a think about this Andrew. If abiogenesis and evolution cannot happen because they violate the second law of thermodynamics (according to creationists), then explain how a single cell can be come a fully mature human being without violating that same law?
From: Andrew on 14 Jul 2010 11:53 "Devils Advocaat" wrote in message news:af6eaf4e-cf5f-4e05-9ad1-e6fa344ec9ba(a)s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > "Andrew" wrote: >> <skyey...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> > And by the way: please demonstrate why life - which we know is not an >> > either/or thing - cannot arise from ordinary chemical processes, given >> > the right conditions? >> >> No problem ----> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/chemical-cr.htm > > Have a think about this Andrew. > > If abiogenesis and evolution cannot happen because they violate the > second law of thermodynamics (according to creationists), then explain > how a single cell can be come a fully mature human being without > violating that same law? Correct. Which means it didn't happen, and multitudes have been deceived.
From: Virgil on 14 Jul 2010 15:46 In article <BtCdnTQP3vVtUKDRnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov(a)usa.net> wrote: > <skyeyes9(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > And by the way: please demonstrate why life - which we know is not an > > either/or thing - cannot arise from ordinary chemical processes, given > > the right conditions? > > No problem ----> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/chemical-cr.htm That merely says that we do not YET know how it could have occurred, but considering how much more we (in science) know how to do each year, there is no reason to suppose that we will not discover how it could have occurred in the future. Creationism relies on present ignorance and inability being permanent, but almost everyone who predicted what we cannot ever do has been wrong.
From: Virgil on 14 Jul 2010 15:59
In article <OaSdnb8PYuzoQKDRnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov(a)usa.net> wrote: > "Devils Advocaat" wrote in message > news:af6eaf4e-cf5f-4e05-9ad1-e6fa344ec9ba(a)s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > > "Andrew" wrote: > >> <skyey...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > And by the way: please demonstrate why life - which we know is not an > >> > either/or thing - cannot arise from ordinary chemical processes, given > >> > the right conditions? > >> > >> No problem ----> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/chemical-cr.htm > > > > Have a think about this Andrew. > > > > If abiogenesis and evolution cannot happen because they violate the > > second law of thermodynamics (according to creationists), then explain > > how a single cell can be come a fully mature human being without > > violating that same law? > > > Correct. Which means it didn't happen, and multitudes have been > deceived. Does Andrew claim that science is wrong about pregnancy, and humans do not start as newly fertilized single cells? In a battle between Andrew and the science of biology, Andrew is guaranteed to lose. |