God does exist.

Be my quest!

So are you going to say that each individual cell has a soul?

Anyway, Frencheneesz asked about a scientific explanation of the difference between a dead and a living cell, which I gave (within my limited scientific knowledge).

Muscle, what, in your opinion, is the difference between a dead and a living cell?

Hans
 
u can call it sub atomic nuclear, fusion, quantum physics, electro freaky magnetics, chemical-x, chupa-chupacabra, thermonuclearparticle gamma ray, green lantern, omega chemical fusion, monosodium glutamate, etc. etc.

LOL, whatever u call life, it comes down to these, its just another word for "the breathe of life". Everything that lives have a soul within it than gives it life, and such life is expirable. Period. Call it, datacarbone chemical lantern, or xedrin fusion electro-lite, LOL u can get scientific if u want and make it sound so intelligent, anyone can do that, I can too, but demonstrate it, LOL, I dare u...LOL, then those things u say "Oh cell didnt just happen, amino acids were clumped together and evolve in a period of time then ching ching! Life came to be", LOL, thats so easy to say, how were they clumped together? the earthquakes did it? So living nucleus was made first then it waited 100 yrs until living ribosome appeared and just as it all appeared, then it died? if u really think about what u just said, realize that anyone can make a theory...LOL, chemical recycling, LOL
 
", its just another word for "the breathe of life". "

If you call biochemical reactions taking place inside cells 'the breath of life' then sure, why not.

". Everything that lives have a soul within it than gives it life"

You don't know this, no one does.

"u can get scientific if u want and make it sound so intelligent, anyone can do that, I can too"

You haven't so far. All you've done is make yourself look stupid, no offense.

"Oh cell didnt just happen, amino acids were clumped together and evolve in a period of time then ching ching! Life came to be", LOL, thats so easy to say"

No, what's easy to say is "Oh some all powerful being whom we've never seen just snapped his fingers and poof cells appeared".

"how were they clumped together?"

Liquids usually do that, you know, clump together.
 
"In a live cell, a number of chemichal processes take place"

Right, but I was looking for more of the why. A car is "dead" when it doesn't work, when you turn the key and nothing happens. I was looking for the "cracked cylinder", or "dead battery", or "car without wheels" kind of stuff.

The human body only dies when the brain goes into a coma and doesn't come out. A cell is a bit different, so what is it? Cells can die by being squished, but im sure there are other examples.

"I laugh at your comment concerning the existence of life "

I laugh at your unbelivable disorientation.

"u can call it sub atomic nuclear, fusion, quantum physics, electro freaky magnetics"

You gotta be like 3 years old. You do realize that those only have incidental relationship to biology. In science there IS NO essence of life. Life is a complex machine, and thats it.

BUT, there was a time when people called "mechanists" and "vitalists" debated that very issue. Vitalists thought there was a "vital force" that was present in living creatures. Mechanists said that life is just a machine that follows the laws of phisics. Mechanists said that even if there was a vital force, it could be explained using phisics.

The vitalists never found proof of a vital force, so the mechanists won...

"Everything that lives have a soul within it than gives it life"

Do you have any sort of evidence for this? Ill answer for you, no.

"So living nucleus was made first then it waited 100 yrs until living ribosome appeared and just as it all appeared, then it died?"

First of all, ribosomes aren't considered "living", second of all, no that is the most crackpot crap I have ever heard.

"ching ching!"

by chance do you mean bling bling? or was it meant to sound that idiotic?

You realize there IS a reason less and less people are becoming religious, right?
For some reason, religious people think they are at a higher level because they have dismissed reason...

Oh by the way, muscleman, the right to talk is a privilage not a right, even thought I just called it a right. Your "right" should be taken away and sealed with staples.
 
Right, but I was looking for more of the why. A car is "dead" when it doesn't work, when you turn the key and nothing happens. I was looking for the "cracked cylinder", or "dead battery", or "car without wheels" kind of stuff.

The human body only dies when the brain goes into a coma and doesn't come out. A cell is a bit different, so what is it? Cells can die by being squished, but im sure there are other examples.
Click to expand...

The way I understand it (but I'm not a cell biologist, actually I'm not a biologist at all), the treshold betwen life and death for individual cells is not as clear-cut as for a complex organism.

For a complex organism, there is a sort of a point of no return, after wich the organism is dead. But even here we run into troubles; not too many years ago, if your heart stopped, you died, this doesnt neccessarily apply any longer, so now we say, if you brain has stopped functioning, you're dead. Even with humans, life or death seems to be a matter of definition, or medical ability. You might say that we ARE able to revive the dead, in the way that a person that would be declared dead in, say 1930, can now walk out of the hospital, fit as a fiddle.

But I digress. Cells are difficult. Some cells can revive even after all life processes have been stopped for a long period, some can survive freezing, some can dry out and survive. It is possible to remove the nucleus from a cell and replace it with a nucleus from another cell.

Mmm, I have to confess I dont know how we define life for sure in a cell.

Hans
 
a cell permenantly dies after it's DNA code is broken or released into environment (i.e. if it's kernel is broken. Kernel holds all genetical information of the cell inside it)
 
Originally posted by Frencheneesz




"u can call it sub atomic nuclear, fusion, quantum physics, electro freaky magnetics"

You gotta be like 3 years old. You do realize that those only have incidental relationship to biology. In science there IS NO essence of life. Life is a complex machine, and thats it.

Im just following your example atheist kids when you cannot find an answer, you resort to "Toothfairy, giant purple squid monkey, or bob the inter-dimensional scientist" If u dont call that immature, then I dont know what is, i replicated your ideas and said "sub-atomic chupa chupaschalupas, or quantum monoxide, glutamate mechanics, electral spyro gyro-omnastic" trying to sound intelligent, a theoretical joke, after all u have nothing but opinions and theories with out proof.


"Everything that lives have a soul within it than gives it life"

Do you have any sort of evidence for this? Ill answer for you, no.

I dont need you to lie for me, my evidence is that it exist and lives, you have the burden of proof to say no its not a soul, so prove your claim then. LOL, Fact is not one scientist can create a living cell, not one. My proof is its existence, the breathe of life, an idea almost 2000 yrs before u were born. If u say God is wrong, then prove it, until then shut your hole..


First of all, ribosomes aren't considered "living", second of all, no that is the most crackpot crap I have ever heard.

Listen, ribosome needs to be living in order to function within the cell. Just as if u take out the nucleus out of a cell to place it in another cell, it needs to be fresh and living, otherwise the whole cell wil not survive. U cannot have a liver transplant if the liver is decayed, the cells needs to be fresh and alive.



You realize there IS a reason less and less people are becoming religious, right?
For some reason, religious people think they are at a higher level because they have dismissed reason...

Less and less people are becoming religious especially in this end times because of the fact that Satan is attempting to bring the whole world with him to hell as his attempt to make God mad. Anf fact is billions are believers of God, though all my claim to know Go-d but not all will enter the kingdom.

Oh by the way, Frencheneez, you have mentioned that mitochondria can live outside the cell and life forms, and that I should take biology class, have u noticed something? Ur words r flawed all the time and that u always have to life, why are you like that? Your "lies" should be taken away and sealed with staples.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Mmm, I have to confess I dont know how we define life for sure in a cell.

That is because life is a difficult thing to define... here are a couple of attempts:

“Life is an succession of energy-producing electro-chemical processes by a naturally occurring, simple or complex organism composed of a combination of molecules, each consisting of systematically arranged carbon, hydrogen and oxygen atoms, and a few other elements, forming cells, which consume 'food' and produce 'waste', both consisting of solid, aqueous, and gaseous matter; the process is called metabolism; the organism is capable of living within the environment without dependency on any other organism; energy use is manifest by growth with size limits for most; self-healing; possibly movement; self-replication with each offspring slightly different; irritability; capable of modifying their living environment, both beneficially and detrimentally; with eventual termination of energy production, or death. Exceptions are egg, sperm, spore, seeds and virus, which do not consume food or produce waste; the first four are replication structures, and the fifth has premature life-terminating capabilities.” C. Gordon Winder (a “concensus” definition after a 1993 meeting at Brandeis University)
Click to expand...
We define life more by generating a list of common properties that living systems have in common with each other. Although, non-living systems may exhibit one or more of the items in this list, they do not possess all of them...
· Self-organizing. Living systems utilize energy from light and chemical bonds to produce organized structures. They exhibit autopoesis: A system that continuously renews itself in a regulated manner whilst maintaining integrety of structure over time (from Jantsch, 1980).
· Carbon based. All living systems we know of require and are built on carbon-based chemistry.
· Replication. All organisms can replicate themselves in some form or another. One consequence of this observation is that organisms grow.
· Cells. Life as we know it manifests itself in the form of fundamental structures called, cells.
Click to expand...
Here's a link with several definitions from various sources:
http://www.bigchalk.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/WOPortal.woa/wa/HWCDA/file?fileid=157826&flt=CAB

Originally posted by Avatar
a cell permenantly dies after it's DNA code is broken or released into environment (i.e. if it's kernel is broken. Kernel holds all genetical information of the cell inside it.

Not true. For instance, in cloning the DNA of a cell is completely removed and is replaced with DNA from another being. Or in genetic splicing DNA may be removed from a cell, spliced with a different portion of DNA, and returned to the cell. In these cases the cell is non-functional during the process and is then "sparked" back to life (sometime literally with an electric charge). Bacteria are also known to pass genetic information back and forth incorporating foreign genes into their own genetic structure.

~Raithere
 
Originally posted by muscleman
I dont need you to lie for me, my evidence is that it exist and lives, you have the burden of proof to say no its not a soul, so prove your claim then.

No. The burden of proof is upon the claim being made (in this case, that souls exist).

If souls exist and you're such a stickler for proof then show us your proof.

Fact is not one scientist can create a living cell, not one.

Irrelevant.

My proof is its existence, the breathe of life, an idea almost 2000 yrs before u were born.

The age of an idea is not an argument towards it's validity. You claim there is such a thing as "the breath of life" then prove it.

Just as if u take out the nucleus out of a cell to place it in another cell, it needs to be fresh and living, otherwise the whole cell wil not survive.

What do you mean by "fresh and living"? Care to define these terms? Do you know that some fungal and bacterial spores can completely dry out and become utterly non-functional (i.e. dead) and then come back to life when they encounter moisture again? Are they then alive when they're not functioning? What if they never encounter moisture again?

Less and less people are becoming religious especially in this end times because of the fact that Satan is attempting to bring the whole world with him to hell as his attempt to make God mad.

Proof?

~Raithere
 
Raithere:

The definitions you cite are familiar to me, but they seem incomplete.

For example a fungi or bacteriea spore can exist for long periods without showing a single of those signs of life, then, when the right conditions occur, it "comes to life", that is it starts growing and metabolizing. But we must assume that it was somehow alive in the meantime too?

And what about a cell in deep-freeze, is it alive?

I guess much depends on definition.

Hans
 
"you resort to "Toothfairy, giant purple squid monkey, or bob the inter-dimensional scientist""

WE resort to imaginary crap? Well, God seems alot like that to me.

"trying to sound intelligent, a theoretical joke"

Our "trying" to sound intelligent is acutally the bi-product of us "being" intelligent. Take .... ..... school .. or something.

"I dont need you to lie for me,"

Ill leave that all to you next time.

"the fact that Satan is attempting to bring the whole world with him to hell "

Talk about full of crap! Muzzleman do you know if they have computers in mental asylums?
Would you happen to have proof that Saten is doing that?

Your arrogant retardization is humiliating to the intelligent population. You say god exists, yet your only proof is that things are too complex for you. "God exists because I don't understand things......."

Oh ya, muzzleman you're mind is like the pandora's box without hope.
 
The definitions of life and death are pretty arbitrary. But instead of asking my stupid question of why cells become dead, Ill ask how MOST cells die and what do they lack or have too much of when they do. ya that was supposed to be a question?

Cells just have different organells that do a certain thing, so when something goes wrong, things either continue abnormally, or just stop. And when they stop something usually eats it....
 
Originally posted by Raithere

No. The burden of proof is upon the claim being made (in this case, that souls exist).The age of an idea is not an argument towards it's validity. You claim there is such a thing as "the breath of life" then prove it.

Like I was saying, the idea of breathe of life came to be way before science existed, and you know what, for you to make a comment that contradicts it and say "There is no breathe of life" an idea that first existed, then the burden of proof is on you. You can easily prove your claim by creating a life form, because then you are proving that there is no God considering the fact its a teaching for many years that God is the giver of life.

I read the info u sent concerning "cloning" and Im aware of that and so is the church. I see how they manipulate and kinda play around existing dna, existing life forms, existing cells. That is like what i did to my stereos and headphones, i opened it and play around with it. Again I dont doubt it when a person is bringing a dead person to life (not literally) but in a sense that its visible through technology when the fact is there are many that will have been dead if not because of technology (as it is prophesied in revelation). there r people who r clinically dead (coma) and is brought back to life, AND WHATEVER IT IS THAT SCIENCE CANNOT EXPLAIN, THEY RESERVE TO THE FAMOUS WORD "MR. BIO-SUBATOMIC- FUSION-CHEMICAL X IS RESPONISBLE", thats very common among pridefull scientist, when a person's cancer is healed through faith to God, they have to say "MR. BRAIN CHEMICAL DID IT" and say "ITS PLACEBO", when its proven Its faith and prayers. I doubt it if a human being can create a person, and bring that dead person to life when dead.

100% Im a believer of God, without a little doubt at all, if theres anything my faith is in doubt, then it will be a doubt if will I make it to heaven, God's existence Im so sure is true. Scientist manipulate, abuse, play around existing life forms, existing dna, existing "bio-chemical, sub-atomic particles", LOL whatever you call life source is, and thats it. If any scientist can create any life form, even a cell, then YOU REST YOUR CASE AND ITS ALL OVER, I WILL COMPLETELY BECOME ATHEIST, I PROMISE THAT, UNTIL THEN SHUT YOUR HOLE. Hope for the impossible (currently proven that is.) for the impossible is your only hope.


What do you mean by "fresh and living"? Care to define these terms? Do you know that some fungal and bacterial spores can completely dry out and become utterly non-functional (i.e. dead) and then come back to life when they encounter moisture again? Are they then alive when they're not functioning? What if they never encounter moisture again?

That is alot like coma, clinically a person is reported dead. Or bear hybernation where they wont eat or drink for many days. And there are even other animals that can literally freeze without a heartbeat or breathing, but later on still survived.

I cant tell you what defines life, however I can tell you that things need order in order to live (in a sense with intelligence, motion, and purpose). It is one thing to observe existing life forms, but it is another thing to create life forms. I rest my case...

[/B]
Click to expand...
 
"Like I was saying, the idea of breathe of life came to be way before science existed, "

That's irrelevant. The Greek Gods like Mars and Zeus have existed longer than Christianity, therefor by your logic it is up to you to disprove their existance. So go ahead, disprove them, scientifically.

"thats very common among pridefull scientist, when a person's cancer is healed through faith to God, they have to say "MR. BRAIN CHEMICAL DID IT""

So basically you're saying you are as prideful as scientists because you will jump to the conclusion that God did it. The truth is we don't know yet. There is no reason to believe God did anything, but there is no proof that he didn't.

Basically, you're a big hypocrite. You criticize scientists of being too prideful then turn around and say God got rid of the cancer without providing any proof of your own.

"If any scientist can create any life form, even a cell, then YOU REST YOUR CASE AND ITS ALL OVER, I WILL COMPLETELY BECOME ATHEIST"

Oh I'm sure that day is coming.

", UNTIL THEN SHUT YOUR HOLE. "

Until you PROVE to me SCIENTIFICALLY that God exists SHUT YOUR HOLE.

"I cant tell you what defines life"

Wow, and just a few posts ago you were critisizing science for not having this answer when you don't even know. :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Xelios
THE GREEK GODS ARE OPENLY DISCUST AS A MYTH, THATS A FACT, ITS CALLED A MYTHOLOGY, I have no reason to talk about myths, such as toothfairy, etc. there r over 1 billion catholics alone and over 1 billion christians, think about it, i mean try to use your brain, ok?



So basically you're saying you are as prideful as scientists because you will jump to the conclusion that God did it. The truth is we don't know yet. There is no reason to believe God did anything, but there is no proof that he didn't.

STUPID STUPID PEOPLE. FOR THE 1,000,000,000 TIMES (F.O.S.)LISTEN AGAIN, I DIDNT JUMP INTO CONCLUSION OF HIGHER INTELLIGENCE, IT IS PROVEN AS AFOREMNETIONED. BUT IT IS LIKE TALKING TO A DOG, U GUYS DONT HAVE THE EARS TO HEAR FACTS. Again intelligence is proven, "chance" or "random chance" IS PROVEN A LIE, CURRENTLY SPEAKING THAT IS, Im not speaking for the future nor prophesying its fulfillment. AGAIN HIGHER INTELLIGENCE (WHICH WE LABELED AS GOD, NOT GIANT PURPLE SQUID MONKEY LIKE U GUYS) IS PROVEN, SCIENTIFICALLY SPEAKING. AS AFOREMENTIONED, GO BACK TO GOD DOES EXIST AND READ WHAT I HAVE POSTED THERE.

Basically, you're a big hypocrite. You criticize scientists of being too prideful then turn around and say God got rid of the cancer without providing any proof of your own.

AGAIN, SCIENTIFICALLY SPEAKING, INTELLIGENCE IS PROVEN TO EXIST, THE OTHER OPTION "SUPER CHANCE" IS PROVEN TO BE ALIE.

"If any scientist can create any life form, even a cell, then YOU REST YOUR CASE AND ITS ALL OVER, I WILL COMPLETELY BECOME ATHEIST"

Oh I'm sure that day is coming.

GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PSYCHIC PREDICTION, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR WISHFULL THINKING, MEANWHILE I WILL BE LIVING IN A CURRENT REALITY, :).

", UNTIL THEN SHUT YOUR HOLE. "

Until you PROVE to me SCIENTIFICALLY that God exists SHUT YOUR HOLE.

AGAIN, HIGHER INTELLIGENCE IS PROVEN (read What i have posted in God does exist), WE LABEL IT AS GOD, NOT GIANT PURPLE SQUID MONKEY, OR TOOTHFAIRY, OR BOB THE INETR-DIMENSIONAL SCIENTIST, BUT WE LABEL IT AS THE SUPREME INTELLIGENCE BECAUSE WE R MATURE LIKE THAT. :)

. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

note: And you wonder why I called you stupid..Its no mystery, people can see that here...:D
 
RE: Bob the interdimensional scientist

This guy thinks ad populum makes those damn Xcam windows appear on his computer.

I bet he is Xev or Tiassa.
 
Frencheneesz:
The definitions of life and death are pretty arbitrary. But instead of asking my stupid question of why cells become dead, Ill ask how MOST cells die and what do they lack or have too much of when they do. ya that was supposed to be a question?

Cells just have different organells that do a certain thing, so when something goes wrong, things either continue abnormally, or just stop. And when they stop something usually eats it....
Click to expand...

There is also a form of cell death called Apoptosis. Its basically a form of suicide. Our body-cells are preprogrammed to only divide a certain number of times; after that, their clock sort of runs out and they die. Otherwise, basically, cells would live forever (unless kille by outside causes, of course). An interesting twist is that cancer cells lack this function, so they can divide without limit.

Edited to add:

I found this:
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/A/Apoptosis.html

Seems to be a serious and informative site.

Hans
 
Last edited:
Interesting that the word "preprogrammed" is used. Isn't there a more scientific word?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top