Write4U
Valued Senior Member
What a novel idea.......Hence the absolute commitment to a wholly naturalistic answer.
What a novel idea.......Hence the absolute commitment to a wholly naturalistic answer.
So throw out logic, sensibility, and science, and install gullibility, myth and conspiracy. Good work q-reeus!You know better. Materialism, a fundamental dogma of mainstream science, has by definition no room for the supernatural. Hence the absolute commitment to a wholly naturalistic answer.
You really think any of your stupid childish revenge tactics get to me q-reeus? You've been walloped...accept it like a man!!Says the mathematically totally illiterate scientism fanatic who is incapable of doing any science. What's more, shacked up with a bible-believing missus who believes in a 'flying spaghetti monster deity' and sucks it up from bible thumping preachers. Wow. Conflicted much? Does that sound offensive? Far more accurate than your totally unwarranted dismissal of a renowned scientist with credentials and track record the envy of most of his peers. I warned you before about throwing stones while living in a glasshouse. You never learn.
I refer you back to p5 #97: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/chemical-evolution.163475/page-5#post-3656038
But, but, but, none of them agree with Behe and Tour and therefore how can all these reputable scientific articles be right?Bloody hell!! Reputable scientific articles everywhere!!!!
https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/a-chemical-account-of-evolution/5133.article
A chemical account of evolution
That's the point. what you see as an obstacle is in fact an advantage. Every chemical reaction or compounding is just a little different , which means that, over time all possible mathematical configurations will emerge, and the right one needs to emerge only once.Famously - no two exactly the same. As for inorganic clays 'replicating' - they are the weathered byproducts of granites and similar primary minerals.
Our Intelligent Designer had not invented them yet. A small lapse in imagination....Where are the diced carrots?
They comprise millions of replications of ice molecules, plus the dozens of replicated patterns that combine to form the six-fold symmetry and the other symmetries of the individual snowflake, plus the replicated metapattern of similarities between different snowflakes in a given fall.Snowflakes don't replicate - they nucleate and grow individually often on seed dust particles
Which includes a large and profound spiritual realm or level of organization.Materialism, a fundamental dogma of mainstream science, has by definition no room for the supernatural. Hence the absolute commitment to a wholly naturalistic answer.
I'm talking about the replication of structures - including chirality - that appears when clays erode and the bits end up regrowing into replications of the clay structure the seed bit was broken from. The best replicators predominate downstream - the less likely or unlucky become scarce, and in time vanish.As for inorganic clays 'replicating' - they are the weathered byproducts of granites and similar primary minerals.
The chances may very well be small, but the assumption that they decline in every case is guesswork - and the assumption that they decline to zero is without material support.On the rare occasion something actually useful as a starter compound comes along, it's chances of progressing further in the right direction steeply decline since a myriad of the wrong kind of reactions will out compete continued growth of the very specific right ones. Huge numbers and immense time scales are of no help and in fact will guarantee failure.
Which includes a large and profound spiritual realm or level of organization.Materialism, a fundamental dogma of mainstream science, has by definition no room for the supernatural. Hence the absolute commitment to a wholly naturalistic answer.
I put your term in quotes, as vague - you would have to tell me. As far as I know the chemistry surrounding the dozens of different kinds of hydrothermal vents is not well understood or anywhere near completely described.They would? Which species pray tell?
It wouldn't, necessarily. So?How would that yield homochiral biologically useful macro-molecules?
There Ladies and Gentleman, the actions of a frustrated peurile child, needing to raise a members Mrs, simply because I deflated his ego, in pointing out why and how, his adored hero Tour, exposed himself as anything but a scientist and nothing more then a religious ratbag.Says the mathematically totally illiterate scientism fanatic who is incapable of doing any science. What's more, shacked up with a bible-believing missus who believes in a 'flying spaghetti monster deity' and sucks it up from bible thumping preachers. Wow. Conflicted much? Does that sound offensive? Far more accurate than your totally unwarranted dismissal of a renowned scientist with credentials and track record the envy of most of his peers. I warned you before about throwing stones while living in a glasshouse. You never learn.
I refer you back to p5 #97: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/chemical-evolution.163475/page-5#post-3656038
As with all discoveries, like when the genetic code in the double-stranded DNA was discovered, they will serve to underscore the magnanimity of God
Yeah incrdible isn't it? And this is the bible thumping bastard that q-reeus wants us all to bow down to and accept his faulty excuse making and misinterpretations.So even if we work out how DNA came into existence god gets the credit
I'm starting to think the game is rigged
Your level of misrepresentation has become extreme - even by your usual unconstrained standards. Here at SF you have unfortunately free rein to indulge in such madness.Yeah incrdible isn't it? And this is the bible thumping bastard that q-reeus wants us all to bow down to and accept his faulty excuse making and misinterpretations.
Whatever floats your sunken boat q-reeus.Your level of misrepresentation has become extreme - even by your usual unconstrained standards. Here at SF you have unfortunately free rein to indulge in such madness.
Please don't mix and match entirely different concepts like that. Someone here may take it seriously.Which includes a large and profound spiritual realm or level of organization.
No. A fantasy based on a wholly inadequate capacity or rather incapacity of clays and other crystaline mineral structures. See discussion of that and other 'hopefuls' here:I'm talking about the replication of structures - including chirality - that appears when clays erode and the bits end up regrowing into replications of the clay structure the seed bit was broken from. The best replicators predominate downstream - the less likely or unlucky become scarce, and in time vanish.
There we have it Ladies and Gentlemen! Right from the horses mouth! https://creation.No. A fantasy based on a wholly inadequate capacity or rather incapacity of clays and other crystaline mineral structures. See discussion of that and other 'hopefuls' here:
https://creation.com/origin-of-life-the-chirality-problem