• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins

Status
Not open for further replies.
JEROME DA GNOME said:
Please present scientific evidence for the origin of life on Earth. As you have stated the source is not up for debate, so please educate the world and present the source.
Click to expand...

It is in the article I linked. At best, you are lazy, at worst, dishonest. Please read the evidence you demanded and that I provided.
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
I think you have hit the correct answer.

The point was presented that because we know that the Big Bang happened therefore life must have come from non-life despite science having no evidence of such an occurrence. Speculation built upon speculation is not science.
Click to expand...
So do you have an alternate explanation for the evidence of the Big Bang or not?

If not, do you concede that the Big Bang occurred?
 
qayak said:
I think you overstate your abilities. You stated that I made a post in support of my post on the Big Bang Theory. In fact, this is either a mistake or a deliberate falesehood on your part.

The post you said supports my post on the Big Bang Theory was actually about abiogenesis and in no way supports my post on the Big Bang.

Now, I suspect that this was not a mistake on your part because you quoted both posts in the same post of your own (Post #999 if you are honest.)

The reason you don't understand myu confusion is because I am not confused, you are. Please try to understand your error instead.
Click to expand...


You are evidencing that you are not interested in a talk about the topic, only obfuscation. I attempted to pull you away from this path yet you persist.

I will remind you of what you wrote in regards to me:

Are you handicapped...
Click to expand...

Are you truly interested in the topic?
 
Naughtyhippo said:
I have read the first few pages of this thread and intend to read the rest as there have been (so far) a number of interesting and informative links as well as some good posts. However, I am curious to know the following - what is so problamatic and threatening to atheism about a single common ancestor for life on earth? Why would this worry anyone? Any atheist (generalising here, I apologise) who didn't know and was then informed is likely to say 'ah, right.' and then get on with their life!
Click to expand...


I would disagree with your last sentence. It is much harder to believe that all plants and animals and dinosaurs and your family and friends came out of a singe cell than say that man evolved from apes. As I said before, I would have to believe a lot of atheists think mostly "OK we evolved from apes - thats believable" but for the most part stop there. Much of the media certainly plays up "we came from apes" but rarely go back to "we all came from one cell". In fact I have never (and as this thread demonstrates a lot of people have never) read this fact in mainstream media or anywhere for that matter. Certainly this won't matter to some, but to imply that's its no big deal, I think would be incorrect.
 
Last edited:
JEROME DA GNOME said:
Nope, are you unaware of what you wrote?
Click to expand...

Can you offer supporting evidence that I am unaware of what I wrote. Please supply the evidence in context with the posts I was responding to.

I believe you will find it is you who is unaware.

You stated it was a scientific theory.
Click to expand...

Yes, I stated that science had a theory of how life started. I did not state that theory was called abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is the study of how life started not the theory of how life started.

The theory of how life started and the evidence to support it was in the article I linked to. If you are honest, you will read the article.

Maybe you are confused as the proper usage of the words in the English language to express your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Actually, Gerome, it is apparent to many here that you are the one who is confused. Not only are you confused over common usage of the English language, simple writing skills and reading ability but you are also confused over basic reasoning skills.
 
Last edited:
wollery said:
So do you have an alternate explanation for the evidence of the Big Bang or not?
Click to expand...

Nope, and I have stated that I do not know. Your list seemed a good starting point. I am consistently amazed; not necessarily by you, by the confidence presented and the vitriol spewed when one does not agree to the assertions based upon speculation concerning the origin of life on Earth.

If not, do you concede that the Big Bang occurred?
Click to expand...

No. I am no discounting that it may be correct, but there are many things that may be correct based upon the data we have. The human tends to come to conclusions.
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You are evidencing that you are not interested in a talk about the topic, only obfuscation. I attempted to pull you away from this path yet you persist.

I will remind you of what you wrote in regards to me:

Are you truly interested in the topic?
Click to expand...

I am greatly interested in the topic. However, I am more interested in your not attributing statements to me that I never made. The person who has derailed the discussion is you. You do not read what I write, you make up statements and claim I made them, you take my words out of context and you demand evidence and then refuse to read and acknowledge it when it is provided.

Now, would you like to go back and read the article because it provides the evidence of the theory of the beginning of life on Earth that you were demanding. It clearly states that life came from non-life and it has been replicated in the laboratory.

Teh only question is whether or not that is what really happened. We know it can happen because we have observed it. We know that the conditiuons were right because we replicated them and life spontaniously came from non-life. So, would it be more reasonable to assume that this is what happened or is it more reasonable to think that there might be a better more likely source for life . . . perhaps god?
 
qayak said:
Actually, Gerome, it is apparent to many here that you are the one who is confused. Not only are you confused over common usage of the English language, simple writing skills and reading ability but you are also confused over basic reasoning skills.
Click to expand...

You can't even spell my name correctly.

:blush:
 
DOC said:
I would disagree with your last sentence. It is much harder to believe that all plants and animals and dinosaurs and your family and friends came out of a singe cell than say that man evolved from apes. As I said before, I would have to believe a lot of atheists think mostly "OK we evolved from apes - thats believable" but stop there. Much of the media certainly plays up "we came from apes" but rarely go back to "we all came from one cell". In fact I have never (and as this thread demonstrates a lot of people have never) read this fact in mainstream media or anywhere for that matter. Certainly this won't matter to some, but to imply that's its no big deal, I think would be incorrect.
Click to expand...
Given that several people have stated that they were aware, from public media and school, that they knew that evolution says that we all evolved from primordial single-celled organisms, and that that information is taught in schools and readily available in popular science books, I can only think that the reason you "have to believe" is that if you were to accept that people can happily assimilate this fact without it undermining their atheism it would seriously damage your world-view. I.e., you can't believe it, and you believe yourself to be a sensible rational human being, so it follows that sensible rational human beings must, find it difficult to swallow this idea.

Anyone who accepts evolution by natural selection must, by definition, accept that it is just as possible for us to be descended from simple single-celled organisms as it is for us to be descended from apes.

You have been presented with evidence which contradicts your belief in every possible way, yet you still assert it without supporting evidence.

Why?
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You linked to an article which tells us the origin of life on Earth! :mgbanghead

This is truly dumbfounding.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have an issue that you have not stated. You asked for evidence of how life came form non-life and I provided it. That it is in an article which explains how life originated on Earth is pretty much expected.

You see, life on Earth is the only life we know of so any artticle on how life came from non-life will have to be about how life began on Earth.
 
qayak said:
Obviously you have an issue that you have not stated. You asked for evidence of how life came form non-life and I provided it. That it is in an article which explains how life originated on Earth is pretty much expected.
Click to expand...

You are admitting that your article describes what is to be expected concerning life coming from non-life.


I asked for science which evidences life coming from non-life.
 
Last edited:
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You are admitting that your article describes what is to be expected concerning life coming from non-life.


I asked for science which evidences life coming from non-life.
Click to expand...

Gerome, I am providing you with evidence that life came from non-life. You are the lone participant in a semantics argument that has gone from absurd to idiotic.

All you need to do is read the article.
 
qayak said:
Gerome...
Click to expand...

After being corrected on the misspelling of my name and your acknowledgment based upon your quoting of said correction you are evidencing that you have no respect for those in disagreement with you or the rules of the forum.


Good luck in the real world.

:gnome:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom