Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[Norman Alexander]

FYI, the post you quoted is partially blacked out (everything above "if so, why?").

Did you do anything unusual when replying?

Nope. Reply button as usual.

 

[acbytesla]

So... life can arise from non-life?
I thought you didn't believe in miracles.

One, that has yet to be fully proven. But this is the point. If abiogenesis can be scientifically proven, it wouldn't be a miracle. You're the one appealing to miracles.

 

[Norman Alexander]

So... life can arise from non-life?
I thought you didn't believe in miracles.

Dude, 0.3 seconds of research!

Abiogenesis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Norman Alexander]

Is that what you have done with evolution?

Dissing me is not evidence for your claims and lack of evidence.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

One, that has yet to be fully proven. But this is the point. If abiogenesis can be scientifically proven, it wouldn't be a miracle. You're the one appealing to miracles.

So, you believe in miracles now? That's convenient.
"There are no miracles, except for evolution." - LOL

 

[Olmstead]

So... life can arise from non-life?
I thought you didn't believe in miracles.

Sigh ...

CB090: Evolution without abiogenesis — TalkOrigins Archive

TalkOrigins Archive page converted for the modernized route-preserving edition.

www.talkorigins.org

• The theory of evolution applies as long as life exists. How that life came to exist is not relevant to evolution. Claiming that evolution does not apply without a theory of abiogenesis makes as much sense as saying that umbrellas do not work without a theory of meteorology.
  
  
• Abiogenesis is a fact. Regardless of how you imagine it happened (note that creation is a theory of abiogenesis), it is a fact that there once was no life on earth and that now there is. Thus, even if evolution needs abiogenesis, it has it.

CB050: Abiogenesis is speculation? — TalkOrigins Archive

TalkOrigins Archive page converted for the modernized route-preserving edition.

www.talkorigins.org

• There is a great deal about abiogenesis that is unknown, but investigating the unknown is what science is for. Speculation is part of the process. As long as the speculations can be tested, they are scientific. Much scientific work has been done in testing different hypotheses relating to abiogenesis, including the following:
  • research into the formation of long proteins (Ferris et al. 1996; Orgel 1998; Rode et al. 1999);
  • synthesis of complex molecules in space (Kuzicheva and Gontareva 1999; Schueller 1998; see also: "UV would have destroyed early molecules".);
  • research into molecule formation in different atmospheres; and
  • synthesis of constituents in the iron-sulfur world around hydrothermal vents (Cody et al. 2000; Russell and Hall 1997).
  
  
• See also the references and suggested readings with Primitive cells are too complex, Abiogenesis experiments assume a reducing atmosphere, DNA needs proteins to form, proteins need DNA, Amino acids are left-handed,

In case of further questions:

An Index to Creationist Claims

 

[Steve]

Are there no glitches in evolution?

Most of evolution is "gliches" - mutations that were not beneficial for the organism. They resulted in the organism dying off All life you see today is the result of the relatively few (currently) beneficial mutations

 

[arthwollipot]

(edited to remove formatting)

Flaw #1: Life Does Not Arise from Non-Life

Clearly, it did. Evidence clearly shows that the earth was once without life. Now it is. Anyway, this is not about evolution. Evolution describes how life changed over time. What you're looking for is called abiogenesis.

Flaw #2: Natural Selection Does Not Produce Information

Yes, it does. The problem here is that you don't have a clear and unambiguous definition of "information". Biology does. If a population gradually evolves over generations so that individuals have more hair, that is new "information" that population has created about their environment.

Flaw #3: Transitional Forms Absent from the Fossil Record

There are lots of transitional forms, even if you don't go so far (like some do) as to say that every fossil is transitional between its ancestors and its antecedents. Archaeopteryx is the most famous - it clearly possesses features both of reptiles (teeth, bony tail, wing - arm - digits) that birds don't have, and and of birds (feathers, keel bone) that reptiles don't have. And it's just one example out of many.

Flaw #4: Irreducible Complexity Prevents New Feature Development

Irreducible complexity (Behe's argument) assumes that early versions of things are not functional. This is untrue. A primitive wing may not be functional for flight, but it is absolutely functional for other purposes. Behe's favourite example, the bacterial flagellum, has been demonstrated to have been evolved from the Type 3 secretory system, which served the function of ejecting contaminants from cells.

Flaw #5: “Evidence” for Evolution is Ambiguous

It is not ambiguous at all, unless you choose to not look at the entire body of evidence, and instead cherry-pick only the most ambiguous bits of it. It is, in fact, very clear.

Source

Here's a better one:

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

Enjoy browsing that.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Dude, 0.3 seconds of research!

Abiogenesis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thanks.
What's that area with all the question marks about?

By Chiswick Chap - Own workImages used:, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=117557658

 

[acbytesla]

So, you believe in miracles now? That's convenient.
"There are no miracles, except for evolution." - LOL

If you think science is a miracle, you have lost it.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Thanks.
What's that area with all the question marks about?

By Chiswick Chap - Own workImages used:, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=117557658

Seriously, back to school for you, child.

 

[acbytesla]

Seriously, back to school for you, child.

What is one to do? He doesn't understand basic science or logic. And refuses to learn either. He repeats creationist talking points and isn't the slightest interested in the rebuttals. He flat out ignores them and just moves on to the next talking point. This is a total waste of time.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Clearly, it did.

So, you do believe in miracles.

Did Jesus raise the dead? abiogenesis, right?

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Seriously, back to school for you, child.

I suspect that Trolling the Athiests is homework. If nothing else who over 14 thinks 'LOL' is a killer arguement?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Seriously, back to school for you, child.

I know what question marks mean, something is questionable.
But apparently, you don't know why.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

What is one to do? He doesn't understand basic science or logic. And refuses to learn either. He repeats creationist talking points and isn't the slightest interested in the rebuttals. He flat out ignores them and just moves on to the next talking point. This is a total waste of time.

How can you say that when I finally came through with some actual questions?

Sounds like you guys believe in the miracle of abiogenesis.

Now if I could get you to believe in the miracles in the Bible.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

I suspect that Trolling the Athiests is homework. If nothing else who over 14 thinks 'LOL' is a killer arguement?

Is that the British spelling for "argument"? (or a typo?)

 

[Olmstead]

How can you say that when I finally came through with some actual questions?

Sounds like you guys believe in the miracle of abiogenesis.

Now if I could get you to believe in the miracles in the Bible.

Are you really too busy covering your eyes to read answers to your questions? Check #687

 

[Jack by the hedge]

What's that area with all the question marks about?

A gap in our knowledge. If there were no gaps in our knowledge, science could stop.

Some people like to imagine the shrinking gaps as places their God might be hiding.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Some people like to imagine the shrinking gaps as places their God might be hiding.

So, the question marks represent miracles?