Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765293 Aug 5, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
There's a ton of evidence for it. Atoms organize into organic molecules, amino acids self-organize, etc.
If one was teaching it, there's a lot of hypotheses to present and discuss with a class.
And there is no competing scientific alternative - so, yes, a responsible professor would teach it by discussing the various research going into it.
What other option would there be, Buck? To give students some holy book and say "despite that this has no evidence whatsoever, and despite that science does, here you go"???
Here's a novel idea...

How about telling them the truth?

"Nobody knows"

Or you might want to have that peer-reviewed first.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765294 Aug 5, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
As the vagina is designed to bear a child and the a$$ isn't, comparing the pain between the two is pointless.
All it is is an attempt from women to argue that they can handle more pain than men, which is clearly false. Ever see a woman get a paper cut?
Was that pier reviewed?

And you said "designed".

Prepare to be burned at the stake.

I shun Thee!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765295 Aug 5, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Poly was specific and detailed in his explanations to you.
Again, I'm not a physicist or mathmatician, but I asked you about infinities related to Einstein's theories, and the physics hypotheses about infinite universe, multiverse, or universe that started itself and you had nothing interesting to comment other than "if the universe was infinite, we could not have a present."
Polymath already destroyed that comment, but you didn't pay him any attention, so caught up were you with your belief system.
Polymath destroyed that?

So he explained how infinite time could be traversed to reach the present?

No, he did not. He gave some mumbo-jumbo dressed up with some scientific language.

He tried to argue that time is only relative to reference frames, which is wrong.

I think I saved the posts where Polymath and I went back and forth on this, and I dismantled his argument piece by piece. I will attempt to locate the saved posts.

You shouldn't make up shit about me, because I have an extraordinary memory and I also save things.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765296 Aug 5, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
What other realms are there?
<quoted text>
Name any other explanation and provide evidence for it.
<quoted text>
Every scientific investigation into any phenomena has destroyed any and all religious argument.
Special creation? Gone. Heliocentric universe? Gone. Static universe? Gone. Demon-theory of possession? Gone. God-theory of disease? Gone.
That's the history that you theists like to ignore. Science emerged from religion and has surpassed religion's explanatory power in every field of investigation.
The only thing you have left is ignorance - that's your "goddidit." It's intellectual laziness and it always gets destroyed when science focuses its gaze on it. Goddidit never amounted to anything. Nothing. Never produced a tiny bit of explanation for natural phenomena or the slightest of technology.
Seriously, if that's your defense, you're most welcome to it.
<quoted text>
I don't investigate abiogenesis, but the chemists and molecular biologists who do are testing lots of hypotheses and have lots of compelling evidence for the self-organization of atoms and molecules into more complex molecules.
Their current ignorance is more detailed than the most compelling religious creation myth, including yours.
<quoted text>
Dogmatic thinking isn't "will science explain everything" but "I believe X because I do and will not change my mind, regardless of evidence."
Want to see some dogmatic thinking? Here:
<quoted text>
See? You have no reason to believe that except that you were told to. That's faith based thinking following dogma. Nothing more.
<quoted text>
B/c all of our scientific theories are materialist, each and every one of them, and because they work very well because of their testable and disprovable nature, and because they remove human observer bias through their methodologies, I believe that chemists and molecular biologists will one day work out how life arose from non-life.
I could be wrong. It's possible some unicorn will magically appear and demonstrate that it created life, or that Buck's ID people will one day work out a theoretical framework for ID, but I just can't see either happening.
Both fail, for they completely ignore the historical reality that science emerged as the most powerful producer of new knowledge and technology the world has ever seen and it did so by shedding non-observable notions of human fantasy.
You said a lot.

You are essentially maintaining that abiogenesis is a philosophical necessity.

That doesn't make it the only alternative. I can think of two alternatives in scientific literature.

Argument from Final Consequences Fallacy. You can look it up.
Bwian Nipoles

United States

#765297 Aug 5, 2014
I dropped a log and God said, WTF? That thing is huge!

I made a boat out of it an place 2 of each aminal on it.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Iquique

#765298 Aug 5, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a novel idea...
How about telling them the truth?
"Nobody knows"
Or you might want to have that peer-reviewed first.
We know more then you might think about the Bible, and the science behind it has been peer reviewed.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#765299 Aug 5, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>What's cowardly is submitting to the father for a lifetime. It's braver to leave than to stay.(If he's a bully)
What most of you men don't get is that labor causes the equivalent of a knife wound on a woman's womb. Don't you feel lucky that your dk never has to endure that kind of stretching? That it never has to be put at risk for an infection by your partner raping you the day after you give birth? There's nothing fair about what women have to endure at the hands of men.
Sex the day after?! That's stupid and crazy.

My ex-wife had a friend that died because her and her man refused to wait. They had sex a week after. Dumb asses.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#765300 Aug 5, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Apples and oranges.
Now do the football.
>:)
Well I just bought a new bottle of Nuru massage gel.

You think that'll be enough?
Bwian Nipoles

United States

#765301 Aug 5, 2014
Bible has some great fake stories in it...100% bullshito. Burning bushes, twin cities of lust, spermfest in the desert....

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#765302 Aug 5, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Was that pier reviewed?
And you said "designed".
Prepare to be burned at the stake.
I shun Thee!
Ya but they use a metal stake, so it can be reused.

"Go green" and all that jazz.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765303 Aug 5, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Sex the day after?! That's stupid and crazy.
My ex-wife had a friend that died because her and her man refused to wait. They had sex a week after. Dumb asses.
My brother, Fountain Crick, nailed his wife in the delivery room.

Nurse had to pull him off.

They have since divorced.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765304 Aug 5, 2014
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
We know more then you might think about the Bible, and the science behind it has been peer reviewed.
That's fine, Worm Dong.

If I see anyone who cares, I'll let them know what you said.
Bwian Nipoles

United States

#765305 Aug 5, 2014
There is nothing to prove...its all fake bullshito....

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#765306 Aug 5, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
What other realms are there?
<quoted text>
Name any other explanation and provide evidence for it.
<quoted text>
Every scientific investigation into any phenomena has destroyed any and all religious argument.
Special creation? Gone. Heliocentric universe? Gone. Static universe? Gone. Demon-theory of possession? Gone. God-theory of disease? Gone.
That's the history that you theists like to ignore. Science emerged from religion and has surpassed religion's explanatory power in every field of investigation.
The only thing you have left is ignorance - that's your "goddidit." It's intellectual laziness and it always gets destroyed when science focuses its gaze on it. Goddidit never amounted to anything. Nothing. Never produced a tiny bit of explanation for natural phenomena or the slightest of technology.
Seriously, if that's your defense, you're most welcome to it.
<quoted text>
I don't investigate abiogenesis, but the chemists and molecular biologists who do are testing lots of hypotheses and have lots of compelling evidence for the self-organization of atoms and molecules into more complex molecules.
Their current ignorance is more detailed than the most compelling religious creation myth, including yours.
<quoted text>
Dogmatic thinking isn't "will science explain everything" but "I believe X because I do and will not change my mind, regardless of evidence."
Want to see some dogmatic thinking? Here:
<quoted text>
See? You have no reason to believe that except that you were told to. That's faith based thinking following dogma. Nothing more.
<quoted text>
B/c all of our scientific theories are materialist, each and every one of them, and because they work very well because of their testable and disprovable nature, and because they remove human observer bias through their methodologies, I believe that chemists and molecular biologists will one day work out how life arose from non-life.
I could be wrong. It's possible some unicorn will magically appear and demonstrate that it created life, or that Buck's ID people will one day work out a theoretical framework for ID, but I just can't see either happening.
Both fail, for they completely ignore the historical reality that science emerged as the most powerful producer of new knowledge and technology the world has ever seen and it did so by shedding non-observable notions of human fantasy.
You can't make the claim that "special creation" is gone, because there's no explanation, scientifically speaking, of the origins of life on this planet.

Creation and abiogenesis aren't the only two hypotheses, theories or guesses as to where life came from.

There's Panspermia, Biopoesis, Cosmogeny, Endosymbiosis, Spontaneous Generation, Clay Theory, Materialistic Theory, Organic Evolution and Creation Theory.

Which one's right?

Why teach one over the other?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#765307 Aug 5, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya but they use a metal stake, so it can be reused.
"Go green" and all that jazz.
Vlad the Impaler just used sharpened poles.

As an enemy army approached, he would impale a few hundred of his own men on sharpened poles, inserted at their rectum and extending up through their torso. and stand them up along both sides of the incoming road.

Many of the armies turned around.

I admire that. They guy knew how to fight a war.
Bwian Nipoles

United States

#765308 Aug 5, 2014
Read the fake bible for comedy stories...there is no proof...prove me wrong you pole smokers...

KI 18:27, IS 36:12 (KJV) "... eat their own dung and drink their own piss."

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Iquique

#765309 Aug 5, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Science can't explain everything. It just can't. It's limited to the materialistic realm, as you've described.
Abiogenesis may be the only scientific explanation, but it's not the only explanation.
<quoted text>
Are we talking history or science?
<quoted text>
Oh? Basically you're claiming that science has removed the Goddidit factor.
How's that even possible since science can't do that?
<quoted text>
Oh.
<quoted text>
I don't have those answers.
Neither do you.
<quoted text>
You mean like claiming that science can't explain everything?
Do you think it can?
<quoted text>
I *believe* that God created life.
What do you believe?
You write:
"Science can't explain everything. It just can't. It's limited to the materialistic realm, as you've described."

However in the materialistic realm science can explain where humans came from, and when they appeared on earth, and through blood/DNA analysis we can follow our early ancestors as they explored the world.

Through science working on other problems such as; humans first appearance on earth, who are what we are descended from, what the earth looked like thousands of years ago, where and when our ancestors traveled the land, what were their characteristics, clan or tribal affiliations, etc., etc. We can relate this resulting info against the Bible and find that it is very wrong

Resulting in: Books like the Bible and the Koran get almost every significant fact about us and our world wrong. Every scientific domain has superseded and surpassed the wisdom of Scripture. kthnx to Sam Harris

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#765311 Aug 5, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Polymath destroyed that?
So he explained how infinite time could be traversed to reach the present?
No, he did not. He gave some mumbo-jumbo dressed up with some scientific language.
He tried to argue that time is only relative to reference frames, which is wrong.
I think I saved the posts where Polymath and I went back and forth on this, and I dismantled his argument piece by piece. I will attempt to locate the saved posts.
You shouldn't make up shit about me, because I have an extraordinary memory and I also save things.
Sometimes, Buck, what you should save is your breath.

You might gain some credibility that way.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#765312 Aug 5, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't make the claim that "special creation" is gone, because there's no explanation, scientifically speaking, of the origins of life on this planet.
Creation and abiogenesis aren't the only two hypotheses, theories or guesses as to where life came from.
There's Panspermia, Biopoesis, Cosmogeny, Endosymbiosis, Spontaneous Generation, Clay Theory, Materialistic Theory, Organic Evolution and Creation Theory.
Which one's right?
Why teach one over the other?
The orgiastic evolution sounds like fun.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#765313 Aug 5, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Why don't you be honest and realize that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about?
How much do you know about chemistry? Molecular biology? Experiments regarding inorganic and organic chemistry?
What are scientists supposed to admit they don't know? That no one fully understands how life began from non-life? No problem - every scientist working on abiogenesis admits that.
Now why don't you go look at what such scientists do know, what research they've done, what conclusions they've reached. Compare such research to the statements of anyone else speaking about the beginning of life.
You're going to get "well, we've got this neat story in a really old book" to "I've studied one aspect of amino acid chemistry for 20 odd years, done innumerable carefully controlled, replicable research on it, and show it to self-organize under these specific conditions. Additionally, it will join with these other amino acids and form this protein" etc.
Creation myths are pure intellectual laziness. The only reason to argue for them is to hate humanity and stifle progress. Anyone who would want a creation myth taught as if it had some validity is a person who doesn't respect knowledge or the deep commitment it takes to produce testable, disprovable, replicable knowledge.
If you never want the answers to difficult questions, turn to your Bible. If you never want cancer treatments or new drugs, insist that medical researchers be stripped of science and given Bibles.
If you want new knowledge and technology, put that thing back on the shelf in the fiction section.
What makes you think I go to my Bible to answer science questions? The Bible is about Poetry, History, Biography, Autobiography, Law, Prophecy and Religion. It isn't a science textbook.

That's as stupid as going to a science book to find out about our souls or emotions.

Why do atheists always seem to revert to that lame argument of assuming that the Bible is referred to as a science textbook?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
virgin taker (Apr '13) 8 min bouks 8
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 19 min truth 543,034
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 30 min MUQ1 259,654
shytown 35 min Baytown 1
does parents like having sex infront of their k... (May '13) 1 hr G4ORCE 95
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 1 hr gangsxofxroses_andii 157
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr HipGnosis 173,812
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 hr Aura Mytha 227,740

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••