New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
- Thread starter Anita Meyer
- Start date
Jack_:
That's abiogenesis, not evolution.
So, let me get this right. You think the theory of relativity is wrong AND you don't believe in evolution.
How many other well-established scientific theories do you not believe in?
That's abiogenesis, not evolution.
So, let me get this right. You think the theory of relativity is wrong AND you don't believe in evolution.
How many other well-established scientific theories do you not believe in?
Big ol' strawman and not a new one at that. In all cases I have seen to date, a "believer" invents your position... that some nebuluous representative of science is issuing that claim. The theory of evolution only covers the adaptation of biological life. It does not cover the processes that resulted in initial life nor plantary formation, nor solar system formnation, nor galaxy formation, nor universe formation, ... etc.
I will train you on relativity.
On evolution, change is a fact.
But, that is not all of the theory of evolution.
So, for that part, why don't you give me a recursive function to develop life?
Nope. Evolution only occurs once life has started.
Riiight.
Nope. Evolution only occurs once life has started.
I am not going to educate you on this.
TOE contends life evolves from chemicals.
So, you are wrong.
OK, if you are willing to confess science does not believe that the BB occured and then galaxies and then life evolved from that, then fine.
State that.
Oh, once you state that, then you will need to explain instinct mathematically.
what is your point here?
Oh, I am not a believer, I only deal in logic.
Alphanumeric,
Well for one thing Sarah Palin and Fox news is a lot more heard (and apparently more informed) than you. And why do you think that is Alphanumeric? Could it possibly be that they are the only ones worth listening to, the only ones making sense and the only ones who truly tell it like it is. This is telling you something… that your ideologies and idiosyncrasies are outnumbered and short lived. The world is looking for answers, and your kind are not delivering them.
By the way if you haven’t noticed the world revolves around religion! Every day on the news and in the newspaper Israel is the center of attention. Always was and always will be. Despite what you believe, the reason for this is because it has always been about G-d and always will be! It has never been about science or you or me personally. Everything that we will ever need to know about our planet and the universe has already been answered for us in the Bible (this includes the stars, the planets, where we came from and where we are going). Science discovers the origin of nothing… and true science will always illuminate G-d‘s word! In the end I firmly believe that science will conduct us, step by step, through the whole range of history until we finally arrive back at G-d. Here is a famous quote by King Solomon found in Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 - What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, Look! This is something new? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/theprimordiallanguage.html
Well for one thing Sarah Palin and Fox news is a lot more heard (and apparently more informed) than you. And why do you think that is Alphanumeric? Could it possibly be that they are the only ones worth listening to, the only ones making sense and the only ones who truly tell it like it is. This is telling you something… that your ideologies and idiosyncrasies are outnumbered and short lived. The world is looking for answers, and your kind are not delivering them.
By the way if you haven’t noticed the world revolves around religion! Every day on the news and in the newspaper Israel is the center of attention. Always was and always will be. Despite what you believe, the reason for this is because it has always been about G-d and always will be! It has never been about science or you or me personally. Everything that we will ever need to know about our planet and the universe has already been answered for us in the Bible (this includes the stars, the planets, where we came from and where we are going). Science discovers the origin of nothing… and true science will always illuminate G-d‘s word! In the end I firmly believe that science will conduct us, step by step, through the whole range of history until we finally arrive back at G-d. Here is a famous quote by King Solomon found in Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 - What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, Look! This is something new? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/theprimordiallanguage.html
Read the material and find out.
For one thing, that you are ridiculously wrong.
Abiogenesis & Evolution
Abiogenesis—Origins of Life Research
Abiogenesis on Wiki
Hello James,
James, the problem is that I really did not explain myself here properly and I assumed you understood when I said 3 that it was a Tetrahedron instead of coining it as a Triangle. Big deal, its obvious you got the drift now and understand the premise that they share the same “face“.
This is also explained in my book properly so as one could see along with being illustrated by several pictures.
To date James and Alphanumeric if you want to twist and spin the word “theory” that is fine. But let me remind you that there is no “confirming” evidence of evolution taking place. When science cannot account for where new genes come from, this then is only speculation, which let me remind you rides on the wing of FAITH (like a religion itself), which is believing in something that cannot be verified. Or should I say, things not seen but believed.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/theprimordiallanguage.html
James, the problem is that I really did not explain myself here properly and I assumed you understood when I said 3 that it was a Tetrahedron instead of coining it as a Triangle. Big deal, its obvious you got the drift now and understand the premise that they share the same “face“.
This is also explained in my book properly so as one could see along with being illustrated by several pictures.
To date James and Alphanumeric if you want to twist and spin the word “theory” that is fine. But let me remind you that there is no “confirming” evidence of evolution taking place. When science cannot account for where new genes come from, this then is only speculation, which let me remind you rides on the wing of FAITH (like a religion itself), which is believing in something that cannot be verified. Or should I say, things not seen but believed.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/theprimordiallanguage.html
Yes there is.
You only need to look at the effect that El nino/La Nina has on the Galapagos Finches to see that.
Or the effect that Air Pollution has had on certain breeds of Moth.
Or Fruit flies.
Jack_:
No need. I'm already trained.
Yeah, I know. I'm trained in that too.
Can you give me an example of a recursive function so I know what you're talking about?
No it doesn't. The start of life is not part of the theory of evolution.
No need. I'm already trained.
Yeah, I know. I'm trained in that too.
Can you give me an example of a recursive function so I know what you're talking about?
No it doesn't. The start of life is not part of the theory of evolution.
For one thing, that you are ridiculously wrong.
Abiogenesis & Evolution
Abiogenesis—Origins of Life Research
Abiogenesis on Wiki
Your "model" is not consistent logic.
Otherwise, you have the math and chemical operations to prove this.
I will train you from math.
The natural numbers are closed under the + and * operations.
That means if you have a NN and add a NN you get a NN.
Get it?
Chemistry is closed under chemical operators.
You take a chemical plus a chemical and you get a chemical.
But, life is proven more than can be expressed by chemistry.
So, your "theory" is inconsistent with nature.
Anita:
That's ok. I hope your book explains it clearly, like you say.
That's a silly statement, Anita.
I advise you to go out and buy a book by Richard Dawkins called The Greatest Show on Earth. It can be found in the Science section of any good bookstore. It covers the confirming evidence for evolution in detail but is written so that anybody can understand it.
Science can account for where new genes come from; the modern evolutionary synthesis does that quite adequately. No need for faith there.
That's ok. I hope your book explains it clearly, like you say.
That's a silly statement, Anita.
I advise you to go out and buy a book by Richard Dawkins called The Greatest Show on Earth. It can be found in the Science section of any good bookstore. It covers the confirming evidence for evolution in detail but is written so that anybody can understand it.
Science can account for where new genes come from; the modern evolutionary synthesis does that quite adequately. No need for faith there.