created by: Divine Alien | Oct 13, 2008

Evolution Debate

19 votes

Who think of yourself as a descendant of a monkey?

Click on an option to vote

  • Christians, Muslims
  • Evolutionists
  • Atheists, Buddhist
  • Scientists
  • Artists
  • Hindus
  • Free thinkers
  • Skeptics, agnostics
  • Politicians
  • Lawyers
Comments
81 - 100 of 254 Comments Last updated Oct 26, 2008

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#83 Oct 17, 2008
Bluenose wrote:
<quoted text>
BZZZZTTTT! Wrong!
Not only do you not understand evolution, but you clearly do not understand basic chemistry (including co-valent bonding), meteorology and atmospheric physiscs. No boubt you don't understand much about any field of science at all.
Who'd have thought?
Please go away and get yourself an education, then you won't look like such an ignorant drop-kick when you come back to post here.
I know that the atoms are bonded by such bond. I wonder if you are educated enough to explain the phenomenon to us here. You seem to have interesting ideas of interpreting the phenomenon of cloud, rain,lightning and thunders. Please do so to show your idiot ideas. To me, you are much more idiot than an orang utan here.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#84 Oct 17, 2008
Bluenose wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course you cannot see a water molecule with an optical microscope, they are smaller than the wavelengths of visible light, you idiot!
Also, please provide some actual objective evidence that hydrogen and oxygen atoms were created by any entity at all. Until and unless you can do that (I won't hold my breath waiting) there is not only no need but there is absolutely no point in discussing who or what that creator may have been.
Did such an idiot like yourself claim that your father or yourself had created the atoms?

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Granada Hills, CA

#85 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
Whom do you think had created the hydrogen and oxygen atoms that are invisible even to a microscope that we use to view a germ?
If it was your god, your are correct coz I also think it is God who did it. Both your god and my God are referred to ONE entity whom we refer to as CREATOR. If it was not created by God, then that kind of person having such thought is crazy.
Okay, let's move forward in your way of thinking rather than try and convince you to be rational.

You agree that you don't know which deity it was that created the Universe, but you insist that there was one.

Do you have any evidence that this deity survived the creation of the Universe?

In other words, could this deity be the Big Bang, and hasn't been heard from since.

Yes, of course, many religions claim they know who this deity is and what he wants, however they offer contradictor positions which negate each other.
The Dude

London, UK

#86 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
Whom do you think had created the hydrogen and oxygen atoms that are invisible even to a microscope that we use to view a germ?
If it was your god, your are correct coz I also think it is God who did it. Both your god and my God are referred to ONE entity whom we refer to as CREATOR. If it was not created by God, then that kind of person having such thought is crazy.
Then thank god for crazy people.
The Dude

London, UK

#87 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
Yeah, I am. Stop your stupidity and accept Jesus as your savior so that you can stop your monkey business here.
Sorry, not interested in preaching.(shrug)
The Dude

London, UK

#88 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
Did such an idiot like yourself claim that your father or yourself had created the atoms?
I do not recall him saying that.

D.A., you're gonna have to learn, it's a diverse world out there, full of lots of people with lots of different opinions on everything - including God. Just because you THINK that your ideas about God are correct, doesn't mean that they are. Your opinions aren't any better than anyone else's opinions.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#89 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
I know that the atoms are bonded by such bond. I wonder if you are educated enough to explain the phenomenon to us here. You seem to have interesting ideas of interpreting the phenomenon of cloud, rain,lightning and thunders. Please do so to show your idiot ideas. To me, you are much more idiot than an orang utan here.
What level of detail do you want? As two outer orbitals of electrons in an atom get closer together, both bonding and anti-bonding orbitals are formed from combinations of the atomic orbitals. This is the effect of quantum mechanics and the electric force on those orbitals. The bonding orbital is lower energy and the anti-bonding orbital is higher energy. The particular distribution of electron charge in those orbitals depends on the specific atoms bonding, their charge states, their energies, etc. The bonding orbitals fill first, followed by the anti-bonding orbitals (because the higher energy of the anti-bonding orbitals).

If the electron density is large between the two atoms, the resulting bond is called a covalent bond. If it is more distributed around the individual atoms, it is a ionic bond. There are versions involving hydrogen called hydrogen bonds (with electronegative atoms like oxygen and nitrogen) and a rather strange three-atom bond that occurs for boron.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#90 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
You are partly correct, Bluenose.
You must remember that a water particle(molecule) consists of 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oxygen atom. The atom contains some form of energy to bind together. You cannot see it as a single molecule even using a microscope that we use to see the germs. A single water molecule is so light that it can rise in the air without the aid of the wind or heat. But if there is wind or heat, it receives additional energy to speed up to reach heaven. In a cloud, these molecules are rubbing against each other and produce electrostatic charge that may try to escape to the earth with tremendous energy that it creates the burning track as lightning and thereby creating a vacuum. When the air rush and collide to fill back the vacuum, a thundering sound is heard.
You must remember, the hydrogen and oxygen atoms were created from energy by God.
It is not the lightness of the individual molecules that causes them to rise. Bluenose had it right: it is the density of a region. Also, a lightning strike does not produce a vacuum. It produces super hot gasses which expend, producing the sound. Second, we understand quite well the 'energy' that holds the water molecules together. It is the electric force as understood through quantum mechanics.

The oxygen was not created by energy. It was created by a rather involved process starting at hydrogen nuclei (protons) and fusion reactions. This happens in stars almost exclusively. Yes, there was a whole generation of stars before our sun and earth formed.

The protons can be said to be formed from energy, but even that is being somewhat hand-waving. It is more accurate to say that the quarks were formed that way and coalesced to form protons and neutrons. Could you give details why you think a deity had anything to do with this? Please include the relevant particle interaction cross-sections, thermodynamics, expansion factors, and temperatures for your proposed process.
Bluenose

Morwell, Australia

#91 Oct 17, 2008
I have no idea how old our friend DA may be, but I would be prepared to guess that he is/was one of those students that sat in the back during science class in primary school and junior high not paying attention at all, acting the clown because he thinks/thought himself way too cool to be bogged down with boring stuff like science.

And now he has the hide to come on here with his obviously grossly uneducated views, badly expressed, almost to the point of incoherance due to extraordinarily bad grammar, wrong word choice, attrocious spelling - the whole three act Greek tragedy - and expects to be taken seriously.

I guess the only function DA has now is that of entertainment. He certainly seems to lack any coherent thoughts, and trying to argue with him is like eating fairy floss (sugar candy to you USians, I think) in the end, totally unsatisfying.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#92 Oct 17, 2008
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
What level of detail do you want? As two outer orbitals of electrons in an atom get closer together, both bonding and anti-bonding orbitals are formed from combinations of the atomic orbitals. This is the effect of quantum mechanics and the electric force on those orbitals. The bonding orbital is lower energy and the anti-bonding orbital is higher energy. The particular distribution of electron charge in those orbitals depends on the specific atoms bonding, their charge states, their energies, etc. The bonding orbitals fill first, followed by the anti-bonding orbitals (because the higher energy of the anti-bonding orbitals).
If the electron density is large between the two atoms, the resulting bond is called a covalent bond. If it is more distributed around the individual atoms, it is a ionic bond. There are versions involving hydrogen called hydrogen bonds (with electronegative atoms like oxygen and nitrogen) and a rather strange three-atom bond that occurs for boron.
I know very well that the each of the atoms has a structure similar to the set up of our solar system. An atom of hydrogen so simple and yet it has several components: nuclei, proton, electron; a nuclei also consists of several components. The water molecule is similar to the multiple simple solar systems. The atom of gold in your gold ring is probably containing billion of minute complex solar systems. Boron atom contains three solar systems.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#93 Oct 17, 2008
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
What level of detail do you want? As two outer orbitals of electrons in an atom get closer together, both bonding and anti-bonding orbitals are formed from combinations of the atomic orbitals. This is the effect of quantum mechanics and the electric force on those orbitals. The bonding orbital is lower energy and the anti-bonding orbital is higher energy. The particular distribution of electron charge in those orbitals depends on the specific atoms bonding, their charge states, their energies, etc. The bonding orbitals fill first, followed by the anti-bonding orbitals (because the higher energy of the anti-bonding orbitals).
If the electron density is large between the two atoms, the resulting bond is called a covalent bond. If it is more distributed around the individual atoms, it is a ionic bond. There are versions involving hydrogen called hydrogen bonds (with electronegative atoms like oxygen and nitrogen) and a rather strange three-atom bond that occurs for boron.
You may explain until the detailed structure of the neutron of an atom.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#94 Oct 17, 2008
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not the lightness of the individual molecules that causes them to rise. Bluenose had it right: it is the density of a region. Also, a lightning strike does not produce a vacuum. It produces super hot gasses which expend, producing the sound. Second, we understand quite well the 'energy' that holds the water molecules together. It is the electric force as understood through quantum mechanics.
The oxygen was not created by energy. It was created by a rather involved process starting at hydrogen nuclei (protons) and fusion reactions. This happens in stars almost exclusively. Yes, there was a whole generation of stars before our sun and earth formed.
The protons can be said to be formed from energy, but even that is being somewhat hand-waving. It is more accurate to say that the quarks were formed that way and coalesced to form protons and neutrons. Could you give details why you think a deity had anything to do with this? Please include the relevant particle interaction cross-sections, thermodynamics, expansion factors, and temperatures for your proposed process.
A deity has a spiritual form that maybe similar to energy. It is the energy that was responsible for the creation of matter like atoms, quantum, photons. This is where Mr Albert Einstein got his equation, E = mCsquare where C is a constant denoting the speed of light. If the speed of light is slow, less energy will be converted to matter. If the speed is terribly fast, all the energy that is supposed to make a creation will be converted into matter. By adding this C, it seems that not all energy is converted into matter and vice versa. Einstein hated the idea that God exists, so he introduced C in his equation so that there is no deity responsible for the creation.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#95 Oct 17, 2008
Are all of you who challenge me here believe in God whom I believe? It's OK if one against all of you here in this debate. DA does not fear you all in term of intellectual and also religious opinion. Please be prepare to dig deeper into your books just to see if you really got the real logic.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#96 Oct 17, 2008
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not the lightness of the individual molecules that causes them to rise. Bluenose had it right: it is the density of a region. Also, a lightning strike does not produce a vacuum. It produces super hot gasses which expend, producing the sound. Second, we understand quite well the 'energy' that holds the water molecules together. It is the electric force as understood through quantum mechanics.
The oxygen was not created by energy. It was created by a rather involved process starting at hydrogen nuclei (protons) and fusion reactions. This happens in stars almost exclusively. Yes, there was a whole generation of stars before our sun and earth formed.
The protons can be said to be formed from energy, but even that is being somewhat hand-waving. It is more accurate to say that the quarks were formed that way and coalesced to form protons and neutrons. Could you give details why you think a deity had anything to do with this? Please include the relevant particle interaction cross-sections, thermodynamics, expansion factors, and temperatures for your proposed process.
The particles, atoms, thermodynamics, expansion factors, and temperatures would not be present if there was no DEITY creating them. Believing that these things simply exist without the initiator is silly!
I think it is hard for you all here to believe that Jesus was born without a physical father who should have actually screwed his mom unless you don't think so or believe that Mary had committed adultery. Atoms did born in such manner to form matter that we see.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#97 Oct 17, 2008
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not recall him saying that.
D.A., you're gonna have to learn, it's a diverse world out there, full of lots of people with lots of different opinions on everything - including God. Just because you THINK that your ideas about God are correct, doesn't mean that they are. Your opinions aren't any better than anyone else's opinions.
I know he did not say that. Did he or you feel silly to claim that the atoms were created by your mom? No way you think so. Perhaps atoms, thermodynamics, gravity were created by the Son of the Bitch!

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#98 Oct 17, 2008
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, let's move forward in your way of thinking rather than try and convince you to be rational.
You agree that you don't know which deity it was that created the Universe, but you insist that there was one.
Do you have any evidence that this deity survived the creation of the Universe?
In other words, could this deity be the Big Bang, and hasn't been heard from since.
Yes, of course, many religions claim they know who this deity is and what he wants, however they offer contradictor positions which negate each other.
The Deity cannot be destroyed even by the Big Bang. The Big Bang is too small compared with the size of the universe. Many people have different image/imagination of their deity but all of them claim that their deities created their environment.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#99 Oct 17, 2008
Bluenose wrote:
I have no idea how old our friend DA may be, but I would be prepared to guess that he is/was one of those students that sat in the back during science class in primary school and junior high not paying attention at all, acting the clown because he thinks/thought himself way too cool to be bogged down with boring stuff like science.
And now he has the hide to come on here with his obviously grossly uneducated views, badly expressed, almost to the point of incoherance due to extraordinarily bad grammar, wrong word choice, attrocious spelling - the whole three act Greek tragedy - and expects to be taken seriously.
I guess the only function DA has now is that of entertainment. He certainly seems to lack any coherent thoughts, and trying to argue with him is like eating fairy floss (sugar candy to you USians, I think) in the end, totally unsatisfying.
I am much younger than you all here but that should not make you all here take advantage of an orang utan from Malaysia who is poor in your language.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Granada Hills, CA

#100 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
The Deity cannot be destroyed even by the Big Bang. The Big Bang is too small compared with the size of the universe. Many people have different image/imagination of their deity but all of them claim that their deities created their environment.
You can't make such a claim.

You yourself admit that you have no idea who or what this "deity" is. That means you don't have any reason to believe that the "deity" survive the Big Bang.

The only thing we can say for certain is that no such deity actually plays any role in the existence of the Universe today.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#101 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
I know very well that the each of the atoms has a structure similar to the set up of our solar system. An atom of hydrogen so simple and yet it has several components: nuclei, proton, electron; a nuclei also consists of several components. The water molecule is similar to the multiple simple solar systems. The atom of gold in your gold ring is probably containing billion of minute complex solar systems. Boron atom contains three solar systems.
No, you are wrong. An atom does NOT have a structure similar to our solar system. The reason is that quantum mechanics considerations dominate at the atomic level. The orbitals of an electron are actually probability densities rather than elliptical orbits like what happens with planets.

A hydrogen atom consists of a proton and an electron. It has the simplest possible nucleus since it only has a proton. Boron consists of a nucleus with 4 protons and 5 neutrons bound via the strong nuclear force as well as 5 electrons in orbitals surrounding that nucleus. Again, it does NOT consist of anything like the solar system.

“Dor sho gha!”

Level 1

Since: Apr 08

Iowa City, IA

#102 Oct 17, 2008
Divine Alien wrote:
<quoted text>
I am much younger than you all here but that should not make you all here take advantage of an orang utan from Malaysia who is poor in your language.
We aren't taking advantage of your cultural heritage, it's your stupidity we find appalling.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 54 min susanblange 318
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 56 min One way or another 172,522
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Ooogah Boogah 115,245
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr macumazahn 136,267
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 2 hr TurkanaBoy 208
Science News (Sep '13) Thu positronium 2,848
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Aug 27 Zog Has-fallen 343
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••