Noah's Ark found?

[154]

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men."

 

[Marduk]

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men."

yup oh boy you got it bad havent you
how long have you been manic like this ?
have you ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder, second time I've asked you this, you claiming to be a christian should know that lying is a sin, so answer it.

lying by omission is also a lie so also a sin, so if you don't answer youre sinning too
fess up and tell the truth, youre not currently taking your prescribed medication are you ?

 

[154]

yup oh boy you got it bad havent you
how long have you been manic like this ?
have you ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder, second time I've asked you this, you claiming to be a christian should know that lying is a sin, so answer it.

lying by omission is also a lie so also a sin, so if you don't answer youre sinning too
fess up and tell the truth, youre not currently taking your prescribed medication are you ?

Do you feel even better about yourself now?

Since you seem to insist that this is necessary; No, of course not, I have not. Have you?

 

[Marduk]

Do you feel even better about yourself now?

No, of course not, I have not. Have you?

Ooh what a lie, how can you not see how obvious your illness is to everyone else 154. your repeated question of do I feel better is an obvious clue always resorted to by those who are constantly asked the same question by their psychiatrists, its a standard test

why do you think everyone here is noticing the same errors in your posts
theres only one answer to that isnt there
youre ill, that youre pretending that you havent been diagnosed is just more evidence of it. So tell me then, ok I will accept that you havent been diagnosed with schizophrenia if you tell me about the time you were admitted with hallucinations

were they audio or visual ?

and perhaps you can tell us all what the name of the medication youre supposed to be on which you have decided you don't need is
which of these is it
Abilify, Clozaril, Fanapt, Geodon, Invega Sustenna IM, Navane, Risperdal, Saphris SL, Seroquel, Zyprexa,
my moneys on Risperdal, that was the one that Rory Lee (the other religious nut) claimed he didn't need to take and you and him have lots in common in the way you respond to reasonable people who ask reasonable questions

everythings an attack on your character isn't it
why do you think that is ?

btw, I was once diagnosed with clinical depression. so Yes, see I am not afraid to tell the truth here, whats your excuse ?

 

[Belz...]

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men."

Do you feel better about yourself, now ?

 

[Marduk]

154, From your profile

154 has not made any friends yet

youve been here for 9 months and not a single friend
why do you think that is, that not even the other fundies here are interested in befriending you ?
they smell it too you see, don't they


nice answers

have you ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder,

No,

youre not currently taking your prescribed medication are you ?

of course not

hmmmm, perhaps you should

 

[Vortigern99]

Abiogenesis is a complex event involving the observable laws of thermodynamics, and the interaction among organic compounds over millions of years.

Please give me your best Cliff's Notes version.

Sure! I've been meaning to review my notes on the matter, and I'm happy to convey them to you in a form that I hope we can both understand.

Please keep in mind that each of the following assertions are based on numerous studies conducted in a variety of different scientific disciplines. I myself am not a scientist, though I have some undergrad anthropology, biology and chemistry, and my comprehension of the scientific method is sufficient to carry me through the following journalistic summary, which I've collated myself based on what I've read and watched.

PREAMBLE: ORGANIC MOLECULES and EARLY LIFE

• Geology, chemistry, biology and chemistry all tell us that the early, pre-biotic ("before life") earth was filled with organic molecules (=any molecule which contains carbon, and which are essential for life). Organic molecules are abundant in space and have been extracted from meteorites.
  
• Early life was so simple it lacked complex protein machinery and enzymes.
  
• Modern cells are separates from the environment by a phospho-lipid bi-layer which is nearly impenetrable.
  
• Modern cells use proteins to move molecules across their surface.

FATTY ACIDS

• The pre-biotic environment of the earth consisted of many simple fatty acids, which did not have the bi-layer and did not use proteins to move other molecules.
  
• Under a range of pH, these fatty acids spontaneously form stable vesicles, which are permeable to small organic molecules. (This is a demonstrable fact observed in laboratories worldwide.)
  
• When a vesicle encounters free fatty acids in solution, it incorporates them and grows larger according to the observable laws of thermodynamics. Eating and growth are thus driven purely by these physical laws.
  
• When the vesicle grows, it adopts a tubular branched shape (because its surface area grows faster than its volume). This shape is easily divided by waves, currents, rocks, etc.
  
• No contents are lost in this division.

GENETIC MATERIAL

• Modern nucleotides are so stable they require complex proteins to replicate.
  
• In the pre-biotic environment, there were hundreds of types of nucleotides: DNA, RNA and hundreds of others.
  
• It takes only one to self-polymerize (see below).
  
• Phosphoramidate DNA is known and observed to be capable of spontaneous polymerization (a polymer is a compound made up of large molecules).
  
• Polymerization occurs when monomers (simple molecules) base-pair with a single stranded template and self-propagate.
  
• Monomers also polymerize in solution, spontaneously forming new templates or extending existing templates.
  
• No special sequences are required here. The above assertions are fundamental, unsurprising aspects of chemistry.

SUMMARY SO FAR: Lipid vesicles can grow and divide; nucleotide polymers can self-replicate. These are observable facts, not imagined or hypothetical scenarios.

NEXT POST: LIFE!

 

[Vortigern99]

LIFE

• Fatty acid vesicles are permeable to nucleotide monomers, but not polymers.
  
• When spontaneous polymerization occurs within a vesicle, that polymer is trapped inside.
  
• Floating in the ocean, a polymer-containing vesicle encounters convection currents, for example hydrothermal vents.
  
• (Fatty acid vesicles are stable under near-boiling conditions.)
  
• High temperatures separate polymer strands and increases the vesicle membrane's permeability to monomers.
  
• Once the temperature has cooled again (because the fatty acid has moved by ocean currents away from the vent), spontaneous polymerization occurs.
  
• This cycle repeats.
  
• Each polymer increases the osmotic pressure (caused by a difference in the amount of solutes between solutions that are separated by the semi-permeable membrane), due to the surrounding ions within a vesicle. This stretches the membrane.
  
• A vesicle with more polymer will "steal" lipids from a vesicle with less polymer -- again due to simple thermodynamics.
  
• This is the origin of competition for resources.

SUMMARY: Monomers diffuse into fatty acid vesicles. Monomers polymerize, copy any template. Heat separates polymer strands, increase membrane permeability to monomers. Polymers attract ions, increasing osmotic pressure. Pressure on membrane drives its growth at the expense of nearby vesicles containing less polymer.

THE BEGINNING OF EVOLUTION

• Vesicles grow into tubular structures. Mechanical forces cause the vesicles to divide.
  
• "Daughter" vesicles inherit the polymers from "parent" vesicles.
  
• Polymer sequences that replicate faster come to dominate the population.
  
• Early genomes were random, containing no information.
  
• The ability to replicate, regardless of sequence, drove growth and division of fatty acid vesicles.
  
• Any mutation that increases the rate of polymer replication is therefore selected for.
  
• Beneficial mutation + Natural selection = increased information.
  
• One early beneficial mutation was to change the sequence to contain only the most common nucleotides.
  
• Another was not forming secondary structures that block replication.
  
• Another was to form sequences that are stable, yet separate easily.
  
• Another was to form secondary structures that show enzymatic activity.
  
• Like RNA, early nucleotides could store information and function as enzymes.
  
• Early polymer enzymes would enhance replication; use high-energy molecules in the environment (near thermal vents) to recharge monomers;synthesize lipids from other molecules; and modify lipids so they don't leave the membrane.

CONCLUSION

Thus we have a simple two-component system that spontaneously forms in the pre-biotic environment, can eat, grow, contain information, replicate, and evolve through thermodynamic, mechanical and electromagnetic forces. No supernatural forces, no ridiculous improbability, no lightining into a mud puddle, no "springing from rocks" or dust. Just chemistry.

 

[Marduk]

Bet you money he doesnt even read it much less understand it

 

[Meadmaker]

Vortigern,
Cool stuff.

Could you give a rundown of which of these steps in the "Life" portion have been observed/recreated under laboratory conditions?

 

[John Jones]

I've answered it a dozen times. Like it is a difficult or complicated question. And like I give a damn if it is not to your satisfaction.

Link?

 

[Vortigern99]

Well, he asked, so I thought I'd be polite and reply. At least it's all down in pixels for the world to read.

(Should I take the bolding out? Is it illegible with all that bold face?)

 

[Shalamar]

Beautiful write-up... But since it didn't say 'God did it', he will dismiss it.

 

[Vortigern99]

Vortigern,
Cool stuff.

Could you give a rundown of which of these steps in the "Life" portion have been observed/recreated under laboratory conditions?

No, I cannot. I made the notes from a number of texts and videos, some of which were library loans, the titles of which I stupidly declined to record.

However, I'm reasonably certain that all of the basics of that portion -- semi-permeable membranes, polymerization, osmotic pressure and lipid stealing -- derive from experiment and observation in the laboratory.

Probably a bit of fact-checking around teh intertoobz will yield the answers you're looking for. My work is done; it's your turn to corroborate and verify it!

 

[steve s]

I would love to meet people who think we came from a rock, by all means, invite them here.

Well, the bible does say "the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground", and dirt ultimately comes from rocks. So 154 is one of those people.

Steve S

 

[Vortigern99]

[1.]Beautiful write-up... [2.]But since it didn't say 'God did it', he will dismiss it.

1.

2. My response to such a casual dismissal would be:

The existence of a divine Creator does not negate the laws of physics and biochemistry. If God created the universe, then He/She/It created it with its laws, processes and systems in full working order, as can be observed in the literally billions of natural phenomena taking place around us.

Faith in a divine Creator/protector can be a positive and joyful experience, but it need not/must not/should not inhibit one's critical thinking skills regarding the observable and deducible workings of the world.

The Bible is a fascinating and sometimes moving document of ancient beliefs, practices and legendary history. Rather than taking every word of it at face value, one can read it with the phrase "IT IS AS THOUGH..." prefacing each chapter and verse.

IT IS AS THOUGH God said: "Let there be light." He didn't literally say it, in English or Hebrew or Aramaic; it's poetry, myth-making, intended to provide social cohesion, to answer what were at the time unanswerable questions, and to assuage the fear of death.

Given the vast and innumerable mistakes and contradictions its many books make, any thorough and critically-minded study of the Bible must lead to the conclusion that the ancient peoples who composed it simply did not understand the world well enough to give a truthful and accurate account of it. It serves as a poetic and metaphorical history, but as real history or science it is virtually worthless.

 

[temporalillusion]

Jesus Christ referred to him by name.

I'll take His word and credibility over yours.

Except that we don't have a record of Jesus' words, just a record of what someone said Jesus said, and those weren't even eye witnesses. And those records are hundreds of years removed from when they were uttered and written.

From John's account of Jesus's supper with the disciples:

"Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards." - John 13:36

"Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?" John 14:5

"But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?" John 16:5

Whoops!

 

[Marduk]

Except that we don't have a record of Jesus' words, just a record of what someone said Jesus said, and those weren't even eye witnesses. And those records are hundreds of years removed from when they were uttered and written.

From John's account of Jesus's supper with the disciples:

"Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards." - John 13:36

"Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?" John 14:5

"But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?" John 16:5

Whoops!

Heres another example that there are really none of Jesus last words on the bible,

Take his last reported words he is alleged to have said with his last breath

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

the Gospel of Mark says the same, but as we know that Mark is copied from Matthew thats no surprise

"Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."

"It is finished."

so what were his real last words, cant have been all of them can it, He cant have said three different things as his last words as reported by three different gospel authors can he

So as Temporal illusion just said

we don't have a record of Jesus' words, just a record of what someone said Jesus said, and those weren't even eye witnesses. And those records are hundreds of years removed from when they were uttered and written.

But of course, 154 you never even thought about that did you. Because your delusional mind helps you to ignore the obvious in favour of something that makes you think youre special
and all the while the people around you are walking further and further away tapping their heads while they go.....

Thats what your God did to you
turned you into a nutter, only, youre not Job, so hes not going to make it right again.

 

[Radrook]

I have personal messages from Radbrook and 154 to the effect that genetic drift pointing back to Africa (rather than Ararat) is inconclusive, since scientists change their minds and since North Africa is close to the middle east.

Of course, while scientists do change their minds when new data dictates, the preponderance of data continues to accumulate to the effect that shows the present world human population has African roots.

Also, the African source of the human race is more in east and south Africa, not North Africa.

Changing of mind weakens trust and credibility whether it be secular or religious.

 

[Shalamar]

Changing of mind weakens trust and credibility whether it be secular or religious.

That is wrong.

People, in this case, scientists do not arbitrarily change their mind. The change the conclusions based on new evidence. If brand new evidence were to be found that humanity indeed originated from Mt. Arafat, then it would be investigated, and if factual, then that is what would be accepted.