Split Thread Signs of the End Times

[Paul Bethke]

How many times have you been told that evolution has nothing at all to say about abiogenesis?

Why do you persist in conflating the two separate things.

Get it through your head. Evolution does NOT address abiogenesis AT ALL.

Abiogenesis the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.
Also called autogenesis. the hypothetical process by which living organisms first arose on earth from nonliving matter

 

[Slowvehicle]

But there is no act of adultery--one may consider it as a miracle in that it was unusual.
Joseph did marry Marry, and Mary had no prior sexual relations with any other man.
Joseph only consummated the marriage after Jesus was born.

In other words, your own standards for what is manifestly "adultery" and "sin" for others do not apply to magic beings.

 

[Paul Bethke]

How many times have you been told that evolution has nothing at all to say about abiogenesis?

Why do you persist in conflating the two separate things.

Get it through your head. Evolution does NOT address abiogenesis AT ALL.

The difference between vehicles and living things is that living things can reproduce. Living things produce offspring, which are similar but not identical. The offspring whose differences are advantageous are more likely to survive long enough to reproduce themselves, passing those advantageous differences on. Vehicles do not reproduce, and hence cannot evolve by natural selection.

You seem to be one of those creationists who thinks the theory of evolution by natural selection is basically saying that the complexity of the living things around us was produced by pure chance. Nothing could be further from the truth. The only part chance plays in evolution is in the provision of variety: the raw material upon which natural selection acts. Natural selection is a far more powerful force than chance - powerful enough to turn billion to one chances into stone cold certainties, given enough time. But it is not a conscious force.

Abaddon now says that it is not evolution as you state—there is still no explanation of what was the original substance of life. As you so apply state, things just happened. No, things cannot just happen.

It was like a movie I saw when young, called the Blob—it just grew as it consumed.

You may not have considered how intricate the world and the universe is---so perfectly functional—there is no way that this can be without a Designer. Everything has a design, otherwise it could not function. A baby cannot live by its own means—but animals can be born and engage in motion.

No my acceptance as the explanation is far more reasonable than the many theories of evolution or as Abaddon puts it---- abiogenesis, and you refer to it as evolution.

But on the other hand what you say about evolution come abiogenesis is that it is possible for species to change or evolve—then it is reasonable for me to conclude that people became black by eating primates and drinking blood over a period of time.

 

[Paul Bethke]

In other words, your own standards for what is manifestly "adultery" and "sin" for others do not apply to magic beings.

You really take the cake, or is it against rules to say--your statement is stupid.

 

[fagin]

You really take the cake, or is it against rules to say--your statement is stupid.

That's not really an answer, try yes or no.

FWIW I think it's a good question.

By your standards god should be killed. Creeping in on a poor virgin in the middle of the night like that. Not even any chocolates or roses.

 

[Pixel42]

What I posted was about evolution, not abiogenesis. I was explaining how simple organisms evolved into more complex and specialised ones, which is by millions of years of natural selection. No design was involved. How the first simple organisms arose is a separate question and field of study, as abaddon says.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Look it is a long post to respond to in all that you have written—this I take is to show how much you know----As I have said evolution is ridiculous as there can be no explanation of how things began, it is just a ridiculous collection of theory.

You appear to be misusing the regular English verb, "respond"...

Here, at the very start, you resort to a common error--an error repeated so often, and corrected so often, that to trot it out again, as if it were a "gotcha", displays either vast, intentional ignorance, or fundamental dishonesty.

"How things begin" (properly, "biopoesis") is not a tenet of the TOE, and is not addressed by the observable fact of evolution by natural selection. Your assertion that "a creator did it" only shrouds the point at which life began in unnecessary cultism, providing no answers.

However, your inability to deal with the actual TOE is, properly, the subject of another thread, should you choose to pursue understanding.

No one, absolutely no one can be certain how this magnificent universe came about without a Designer.

Again, this is off topic, and should not be pursued here--but I will point out that asserting, with no evidence, the existence of a "designer" raises more questions than it purports to answer. For instance: who (or what) "designed" your designer? (I know, it's "designers" all the way down...)

A vehicle must be designed it cannot just evolve out of nothing, the same with everything about us, all speaks of a designer.

This is another one of those "gotcha" errors, the mindless repetition of which, in the face of patient correction, certainly looks like intentional dishonesty. One wonders why you would expect that "vehicles", which do not reproduce, would demonstrate evolution by natural selection. If you choose to pursue actual understanding, you ought to ask honest questions in another thread.

The human body with its many functions had to be designed, fingerprints, DNA as we know it today is unique.

The human body, with all its foibles, weaknesses, fragilities, bad designs, and "just good enough" solutions, was demonstrably inherited from other living things on the planet; among other things, it shows no evidence of having passed through an 8-individual bottleneck (however long ago you believe the Noachian inbreeding experiment was made to run [a question you continue to avoid answering], it left no evidence at all--which was the point of my post, which you have clumsily and indifferently honestly tried to sidestep without "responding"). This, too, is properly the subject of another thread.

I am an electrical technician and am amazed how intricate the generation of power is---but it has to be designed, and maintained to function perfectly.

If you were a competent electrical engineer, one would expect that you would eventually notice that electrical generators do not in fact, reproduce. As stated above, this dishonest attempt at a "gotcha" has nothing to do with your assertions about the "end times" (mysteriously delayed by 200 centuries, more or less). All of this is OT for this thread.

I do marvel at what man has achieved, but that is progress, all the elements were there for him to correlate into his designs.

So what you infer is that if I plant a piece of gold a watch will eventually emerge.

This statement is a fabrication; an outright lie about anything I have ever "inferred". I encourage you to quote anything I have ever said, or wirtten, in this or any other forum, in this or any other medium, that allows you to justify making this false statement. Failing this, I insist you retract it.

I will accept your apology, and, if you so choose, we could pursue your blatant misunderstandings (and your other falsehoods) about the TOE in another thread.

Do not repeat your error and continue to tell lies about what I have said.

It was like Aaron who explained to Moses--- Exo 32:24 So I told them, 'Whoever has any gold jewellery, take it off.' Then they gave me the gold, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf!"
Now that is certainly a ridiculous excuse to make—but that is what evolution sounds like.

You are right--your fairy tales contain many examples of ridiculous stories. This one, however, has nothing to do with any honest formulation of the actual TOE, or, for that matter, any bearing on the "Signs of the end times".

Perhaps in that one you might actually address the reality that ƴ ͤ fludde left no evidence of any kind at all...

 

[Slowvehicle]

It is far more reasonable to believe in a Creator who has the ability to create such vast worlds than to try and believe that things just happened out of some small little thing, that people are not sure what it was.
What was it??
Even if you took a piece of clay and left it on the table it would not change into anything.

Abiogenesis the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.

Your continued errors, which, in the face of constant, patient correction, look so much like intentional falsehoods, are properly the subject of another thread.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Abiogenesis the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.
Also called autogenesis. the hypothetical process by which living organisms first arose on earth from nonliving matter

Your continued, erroneous misstatements about biopoesis (and your attempts to pretend that biopoesis is part of the actual TOE) are, properly, the subject of a different thread. This one is supposed to be about what you consider to be "Signs of the end times".

 

[Slowvehicle]

Abaddon now says that it is not evolution as you state—there is still no explanation of what was the original substance of life. As you so apply state, things just happened. No, things cannot just happen.

It was like a movie I saw when young, called the Blob—it just grew as it consumed.

You may not have considered how intricate the world and the universe is---so perfectly functional—there is no way that this can be without a Designer. Everything has a design, otherwise it could not function. A baby cannot live by its own means—but animals can be born and engage in motion.

No my acceptance as the explanation is far more reasonable than the many theories of evolution or as Abaddon puts it---- abiogenesis, and you refer to it as evolution.

But on the other hand what you say about evolution come abiogenesis is that it is possible for species to change or evolve—then it is reasonable for me to conclude that people became black by eating primates and drinking blood over a period of time.

Your continued misstatements about the TOE, and your erroneous assertions that biopoesis is the same thing as the TOE, all belong in another thread. Neither the TOE, nor any of the current ideas about how living things came to be living things (even your assertions with no evidence, that a "designer" had to be involved), address "Signs of the end times".

 

[Slowvehicle]

That's not really an answer, try yes or no.

FWIW I think it's a good question.

By your standards god should be killed. Creeping in on a poor virgin in the middle of the night like that. Not even any chocolates or roses.

...to say nothing of the poster's assertion about what Joseph may or may not have done, after the "Nativity"...a "tangled web" indeed.

 

[Slowvehicle]

You really take the cake, or is it against rules to say--your statement is stupid.

I see. Where it is "not-stupid" to claim that a "holy ghost of 'god' " could fructify a woman...

 

[Crossbow]

Now you have made my day with those encouraging words. So I will be the first to show that there is God.

You still have failed to show that there is a God.

Which is not surprising at all considering you long record of failure which I (and many, many other people) first noticed at just about the same time you joined the Forum when you promised that 'blinding' nonsense about 14 years ago.

 

[Rincewind]

In other words, your own standards for what is manifestly "adultery" and "sin" for others do not apply to magic beings.

Still, it was good of Paul to agree that Jesus was born out of wedlock...

 

[Peregrinus]

[/hilite]


You may not have considered how intricate the world and the universe is---so perfectly functional—there is no way that this can be without a Designer.

A value judgement based on problematic, conjectural abstractions and without a shred of supporting evidence.

 

[Foster Zygote]

[/hilite]



Abaddon now says that it is not evolution as you state—there is still no explanation of what was the original substance of life. As you so apply state, things just happened. No, things cannot just happen.

It was like a movie I saw when young, called the Blob—it just grew as it consumed.

You may not have considered how intricate the world and the universe is---so perfectly functional—there is no way that this can be without a Designer. Everything has a design, otherwise it could not function. A baby cannot live by its own means—but animals can be born and engage in motion.

No my acceptance as the explanation is far more reasonable than the many theories of evolution or as Abaddon puts it---- abiogenesis, and you refer to it as evolution.

But on the other hand what you say about evolution come abiogenesis is that it is possible for species to change or evolve—then it is reasonable for me to conclude that people became black by eating primates and drinking blood over a period of time.

Paul, if you really want to go into the subject of your appalling ignorance of biology, it needs to be moved to a new thread in the science sub-forum.

Evolution by natural selection explains how populations change over time do to the effects of the environment on the reproductive success of variations within those populations from generation to generation. Abiogenesis is the thermodynamic process that generated the first self-replicating polymers. Environmental selection was probably involved in this process, and it is related to the subject of evolution by natural selection. But knowledge of a biogenesis isn't required to understand evolution.

And no, your racist beliefs are not reasonable, for the simple fact that there is no reason behind them. The earliest humans evolved in equatorial Africa in a hot, sunny environment where melanin offered protection. As human populations migrated to colder parts of the planet, melanin was selected against because it blocked the less intense sunlight too much and prevented the production of vitamin D in the skin. The funny thing is that people didn't turn from light to dark be eating monkey blood, but rather they turned from dark to light by moving to cooler climates. But the genetic diversity still exists within you to have descendants who go back to having dark skin. If a hundred thousand people just like you were place on a planet with a hot, sunny climate and left to reproduce generation after generation, toiling in the fields, the individuals with slightly more melanin would have slightly greater reproductive success and eventually, after enough generations, they would have skin as dark as any African population.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Your continued misstatements about the TOE, and your erroneous assertions that biopoesis is the same thing as the TOE, all belong in another thread. Neither the TOE, nor any of the current ideas about how living things came to be living things (even your assertions with no evidence, that a "designer" had to be involved), address "Signs of the end times".

I said evolution and someone else told me it was wrong—so the end times is to deal what will take place in the END, or beginning---so there is a point that God will have to reveal himself in order to put an End to all the misstatements about him are resolved.

 

[Paul Bethke]

That's not really an answer, try yes or no.

FWIW I think it's a good question.

By your standards god should be killed. Creeping in on a poor virgin in the middle of the night like that. Not even any chocolates or roses.

It was with the consent of Mary that the miracle took place, without any sexual participation.
Today with modern medical science a virgin can become pregnant without having sex.

 

[Paul Bethke]

What I posted was about evolution, not abiogenesis. I was explaining how simple organisms evolved into more complex and specialised ones, which is by millions of years of natural selection. No design was involved. How the first simple organisms arose is a separate question and field of study, as abaddon says.

But what was the first organism???

 

[Paul Bethke]

You appear to be misusing the regular English verb, "respond"...

Here, at the very start, you resort to a common error--an error repeated so often, and corrected so often, that to trot it out again, as if it were a "gotcha", displays either vast, intentional ignorance, or fundamental dishonesty.

"How things begin" (properly, "biopoesis") is not a tenet of the TOE, and is not addressed by the observable fact of evolution by natural selection. Your assertion that "a creator did it" only shrouds the point at which life began in unnecessary cultism, providing no answers.

However, your inability to deal with the actual TOE is, properly, the subject of another thread, should you choose to pursue understanding.



Again, this is off topic, and should not be pursued here--but I will point out that asserting, with no evidence, the existence of a "designer" raises more questions than it purports to answer. For instance: who (or what) "designed" your designer? (I know, it's "designers" all the way down...)



This is another one of those "gotcha" errors, the mindless repetition of which, in the face of patient correction, certainly looks like intentional dishonesty. One wonders why you would expect that "vehicles", which do not reproduce, would demonstrate evolution by natural selection. If you choose to pursue actual understanding, you ought to ask honest questions in another thread.



The human body, with all its foibles, weaknesses, fragilities, bad designs, and "just good enough" solutions, was demonstrably inherited from other living things on the planet; among other things, it shows no evidence of having passed through an 8-individual bottleneck (however long ago you believe the Noachian inbreeding experiment was made to run [a question you continue to avoid answering], it left no evidence at all--which was the point of my post, which you have clumsily and indifferently honestly tried to sidestep without "responding"). This, too, is properly the subject of another thread.



If you were a competent electrical engineer, one would expect that you would eventually notice that electrical generators do not in fact, reproduce. As stated above, this dishonest attempt at a "gotcha" has nothing to do with your assertions about the "end times" (mysteriously delayed by 200 centuries, more or less). All of this is OT for this thread.



This statement is a fabrication; an outright lie about anything I have ever "inferred". I encourage you to quote anything I have ever said, or wirtten, in this or any other forum, in this or any other medium, that allows you to justify making this false statement. Failing this, I insist you retract it.

I will accept your apology, and, if you so choose, we could pursue your blatant misunderstandings (and your other falsehoods) about the TOE in another thread.

Do not repeat your error and continue to tell lies about what I have said.



You are right--your fairy tales contain many examples of ridiculous stories. This one, however, has nothing to do with any honest formulation of the actual TOE, or, for that matter, any bearing on the "Signs of the end times".

Perhaps in that one you might actually address the reality that ƴ ͤ fludde left no evidence of any kind at all...

OK so this is off topic, but it still remains that what I have said is a reasonable view of an unreasonable theory that everything just came about by chance without the intervention of anyone.
No matter if I use the wrong words to communicate the TOE, that you speak of and no matter how eloquent your response is—it is still absurd to believe in TOE.
The END times is to put an END to this theory, will be the beginning of truth.