"The sum of all fears" can you feel it upon your planet its about to be released do you hear it talking do you feel it coming??
Why does that make sense? Do you have any evidence that this was so?It makes sense, that if life was designed, that the designers would use basic building blocks which are easily available in the environment. In other words, the designer would make the environment likely to produce these building blocks using relatively simple mechanisms.
No, it does not.It only makes sense.
We would get the point if you made sense.Would the designer of a mass producer of cars decide to use materials available only on the moon? Sure, with enough money it certainly could be done.... but well, you get the point.
Only if you believe that fairies also exist in the bottom of the garden, because, well, it does make sense.So no, I don't think those findings are really so significant. In fact, some might say that a universe so conducive to forming the basic building blocks necessary for life, is evidence "pointing" towards a creator. I wouldn't say that. But it does make logical sense.
"The sum of all fears" can you feel it upon your planet its about to be released do you hear it talking do you feel it coming??
Thanks and praises to the most high.
Its seems the sleep was upon more than two thousand years the OHM has spoken now awakened...
The mighty Georg Ohm spoke about 200 years ago actually. And he said "Let there be a voltage potential proportional to the current times the resistance." And it was so. And he saw that it was good.Its seems the sleep was upon more than two thousand years the OHM has spoken now awakened...
Failure to do so has resulted in moderation - a 10 point warning in this instance.Failure to do so will result in moderation.
Yes and he was inspired indeed.The mighty Georg Ohm spoke about 200 years ago actually. And he said "Let there be a voltage potential proportional to the current times the resistance." And it was so. And he saw that it was good.
Thanks James its about time someone stood up to bells.Failure to do so has resulted in moderation - a 10 point warning in this instance.
I gave you a gift James I gave you all a gift ,we are all going to die... "smile" in between.You would have received the warning and the points, Jason. Apparently you didn't realise that I'm 100% in agreement with Bells (just less tolerant, maybe). You picked a bad thread to preach in, by the way.
I guess my point is that abiogenesis should not get a free ride just because anything else would seem unnatural. I don't necessarily believe in creation/intelligent design per se; but within the confines of the known universe, with all it's physical laws, I know logically that the mechanisms of abiogenisis could not possibly come to fruition in reality...the law of probability stands in the way.
What seems more unnatural to you: picking the winning numbers every week of your life by dumb luck alone, or the possibility that you may have psychic abilities?
I gave you a warning about it in the thread. James issued you with an infraction for it.Thanks James its about time someone stood up to bells.
And this hopelessly inadequate analogy is just further proof. The truth is that the emergence of life on just one planet is something more like a billion people buying a billion lottery tickets in a billion different draws every day for a billion years until some seemingly unlikely but at this point statistically inevitable series of wins occurs. That's abiogenesis, and as pointed out earlier because the nature of matter is conducive to it anyway the draws are never actually random; they are constrained to a mere subset of possibilities by the natural order. So this leaves plenty of opportunities for the process to actually get started and then fail (for whatever reason) before finally assuming more robust forms in more favourable conditions for much greater lengths of time.
Mod Note
John Marshall, here is a brush up on this site's rules:
This is particularly so in a science forum. Please keep your religious woo restricted to the religious forum.24. Preaching is giving a sermon, often but not always of a religious nature, stating how people should or should not act, as if the sermon itself were self-evidently true.
25. Proselytising is attempting to convert others to one’s own beliefs, often with threats of adverse consequences if one refuses to convert.
26. Evangelising is where the poster’s main aim is to spread the word about his or her beliefs, without being interested in real discussion or critical analysis.
27. The moderator team takes a dim view of propaganda, preaching, proselytising and evangelising. Engaging in these activities is not guaranteed to get you banned, but you do so at your own risk.
Failure to do so will result in moderation.
Thank you.
You still remain a prick, a thorn in sciforums side, the sooner you fuck off the better.You would have received the warning and the points, Jason. Apparently you didn't realise that I'm 100% in agreement with Bells (just less tolerant, maybe). You picked a bad thread to preach in, by the way.
Umm.. Scientists make this statement all the time. So what are you talking about?
They are fools, grasping onto a hypothesis to justify no need for a God at all. Fools would say abiogenesis is a scientific theory, look it up if you want to learn.
Last post on this. You believe what you want, the day abiogenesis becomes a scientific theory is the day I'll take it seriously.Are you still confused about this? Abiogenesis is about the naturalistic evidence for the formation of life. It offends you because it does not require a deity to initiate it. It is not about disproving God.
So first you claim that they don't say that. Then you admit that they do but they are fools?They are fools, grasping onto a hypothesis to justify no need for a God at all. Fools would say abiogenesis is a scientific theory, look it up if you want to learn.Umm.. Scientists make this statement all the time. So what are you talking about?You're getting a bit too keen to suggest that abiogenesis did create life. No scientist would put their neck on the line by making the statement you've just made.It is, given the chemical evidence, exceedingly likely that abiogenesis proceeded from natural phenomena. I cite some of this above.