Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Good summation.

You may have come across this thread only recently but there are two primary young earth / flat earth fundamentalist Christians who take a literal view of the biblical tales and fables. Noah’s Ark, global flood, miracles, plagues, all of it literally true. Science is derided as evil and “evolutionist scientists” are the worst of the worst.

Wrong again hollie,i am sort of a young earth creationist,UR has repeatedly told you he is an old earth ID proponent.

 

[Hollie]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Then surely you can explain how a cell formed naturally with all the necessary components. Don't forget the molecular machines that had to evolve to do what they do within the cell.

I will take purposeful design over random chaotic chance anyday.

There is no such thing as a "molecular machine". That is a silly term frequently used within the fundie christian creationist community which displays an appalling lack of science knowledge. An appalling lack of science knowledge typically defines the fundie christian creationist community.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Such as? Unless you rewrite the laws of physics then it's pretty conclusive evidence.

First off, there are no conclusive evidence in science,why do you think theories contiue changing ? theories are based on opinions of evidence.

The universe had a beginning,if that is the case where did matter come from to create the universe and all living organisms in it ?

Where did the matter come from for the Big Bang ?


If the universe has a beginning, space, energy,matter all had a start we are led to another question what was the cause of that beginning ? In recent years these items are said to have come from nothing by redefining what nothing means. These suggestions are faith approaches and are not based on evidence. They do not answer the question. One also has to be conscious of the conservation laws of science which state that in any process all physical quantities charge, mass, spin, baryon number, etc, must be conserved. You cannot destroy or create the things about which we are talking without paying attention to the conservation laws, and if you agree there was a beginning and try to maintain it was uncaused, you have a contradiction with an established scientific law.

We don't know what caused the big bang. I'm not disputing that. We know it was 13.75 billion years ago and not 6000 years ago. That is the point I am making.

No you don't,that is what some opinions have taught.

 

[Hollie]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Good summation.

You may have come across this thread only recently but there are two primary young earth / flat earth fundamentalist Christians who take a literal view of the biblical tales and fables. Noah’s Ark, global flood, miracles, plagues, all of it literally true. Science is derided as evil and “evolutionist scientists” are the worst of the worst.

Wrong again hollie,i am sort of a young earth creationist,UR has repeatedly told you he is an old earth ID proponent.

You are not just sort of but thoroughly confused. The other fundie holds views nearly identical to yours. Of course, your views are not yours at all but copied and pasted from charlatans at the ICR and similar hack, fundie propaganda groups.

 

[rabbitthekitten]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Then surely you can explain how a cell formed naturally with all the necessary components. Don't forget the molecular machines that had to evolve to do what they do within the cell.

I will take purposeful design over random chaotic chance anyday.

I

I'm not a biologist but I understand a lot of it symbiotic relationships and natural selection. Chloroplasts for example were light sensitive bacteria that fused with other cells. Microchrondia are another example.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Then surely you can explain how a cell formed naturally with all the necessary components. Don't forget the molecular machines that had to evolve to do what they do within the cell.

I will take purposeful design over random chaotic chance anyday.

There is no such thing as a "molecular machine". That is a silly term frequently used within the fundie christian creationist community which displays an appalling lack of science knowledge. An appalling lack of science knowledge typically defines the fundie christian creationist community.

Oh boy no point in me responding to your ignorance.

What transcribes genetic information hollie ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Good summation.

You may have come across this thread only recently but there are two primary young earth / flat earth fundamentalist Christians who take a literal view of the biblical tales and fables. Noah’s Ark, global flood, miracles, plagues, all of it literally true. Science is derided as evil and “evolutionist scientists” are the worst of the worst.

Wrong again hollie,i am sort of a young earth creationist,UR has repeatedly told you he is an old earth ID proponent.

You are not just sort of but thoroughly confused. The other fundie holds views nearly identical to yours. Of course, your views are not yours at all but copied and pasted from charlatans at the ICR and similar hack, fundie propaganda groups.

Take a hike hollie you exhibit only rhetoric, we are discussing science.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well, this is first year uni stuff again. It was a process, it wasn't just one big leap from non organic to organic. Reactions on earth in the early days caused organic compounds to form. Not living organisms, but compounds made of organic material. This has been done in the lab. This then changed and reacted to form simple single celled organisms. It's not a big mystery, the details are not known because we can't be sure of the exact make up of the atmosphere billions of years ago. But the general process is known.

Then surely you can explain how a cell formed naturally with all the necessary components. Don't forget the molecular machines that had to evolve to do what they do within the cell.

I will take purposeful design over random chaotic chance anyday.

I

I'm not a biologist but I understand a lot of it symbiotic relationships and natural selection. Chloroplasts for example were light sensitive bacteria that fused with other cells. Microchrondia are another example.

I have a degree in molecular biology and I understand many arguments from both sides. I have been debating this for many years I have not seen any question that would not be asked from either side.

 

[rabbitthekitten]

Then surely you can explain how a cell formed naturally with all the necessary components. Don't forget the molecular machines that had to evolve to do what they do within the cell.

I will take purposeful design over random chaotic chance anyday.

I

I'm not a biologist but I understand a lot of it symbiotic relationships and natural selection. Chloroplasts for example were light sensitive bacteria that fused with other cells. Microchrondia are another example.

I have a degree in molecular biology and I understand many arguments from both sides. I have been debating this for many years I have not seen any question that would not be asked from either side.

If you had a degree in biology you wouldn't believe in creationism. Unless its from one of those crackpot universities that no one takes seriously.

 

[Hollie]

First off, there are no conclusive evidence in science,why do you think theories contiue changing ? theories are based on opinions of evidence.

The universe had a beginning,if that is the case where did matter come from to create the universe and all living organisms in it ?

Where did the matter come from for the Big Bang ?


If the universe has a beginning, space, energy,matter all had a start we are led to another question what was the cause of that beginning ? In recent years these items are said to have come from nothing by redefining what nothing means. These suggestions are faith approaches and are not based on evidence. They do not answer the question. One also has to be conscious of the conservation laws of science which state that in any process all physical quantities charge, mass, spin, baryon number, etc, must be conserved. You cannot destroy or create the things about which we are talking without paying attention to the conservation laws, and if you agree there was a beginning and try to maintain it was uncaused, you have a contradiction with an established scientific law.

We don't know what caused the big bang. I'm not disputing that. We know it was 13.75 billion years ago and not 6000 years ago. That is the point I am making.

No you don't,that is what some opinions have taught.

The Big Bang has been measured, at least the cosmic background radiation resulting from it, which is the "glow" left over from the explosion itself. Confirmation of this radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, two Bell Labs researchers, who later won the Nobel Prize for their discovery.

Ignoring science, and the knowledge it brings, will not magically make your supernatural, supermagical gods true.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I

I'm not a biologist but I understand a lot of it symbiotic relationships and natural selection. Chloroplasts for example were light sensitive bacteria that fused with other cells. Microchrondia are another example.

I have a degree in molecular biology and I understand many arguments from both sides. I have been debating this for many years I have not seen any question that would not be asked from either side.

If you had a degree in biology you wouldn't believe in creationism. Unless its from one of those crackpot universities that no one takes seriously.

Must I provide you with others holding degrees in the sciences that are young earth creationist that attended a credible university ? does the University of Arizona teach young earth creationism ? me falling on the side of creation is from my own reasoning of the evidence.

I did cell and mutation research for eleven years,. I am now a what you would call a creationist.

You were reduced to the same rhetoric hollie exhibits,have a good day.

 

[Hollie]

I have a degree in molecular biology and I understand many arguments from both sides. I have been debating this for many years I have not seen any question that would not be asked from either side.

If you had a degree in biology you wouldn't believe in creationism. Unless its from one of those crackpot universities that no one takes seriously.

Must I provide you with others holding degrees in the sciences that are young earth creationist ? does the University of Arizona teach young earth creationism ? me falling on the side of creation is from my own reasoning of the evidence.

I did cell and mutation research for eleven years.

You were reduced to the same rhetoric hollie exhibits,have a good day.

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

 

[rabbitthekitten]

If you had a degree in biology you wouldn't believe in creationism. Unless its from one of those crackpot universities that no one takes seriously.

Must I provide you with others holding degrees in the sciences that are young earth creationist ? does the University of Arizona teach young earth creationism ? me falling on the side of creation is from my own reasoning of the evidence.

I did cell and mutation research for eleven years.

You were reduced to the same rhetoric hollie exhibits,have a good day.

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

She has a point.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Must I provide you with others holding degrees in the sciences that are young earth creationist ? does the University of Arizona teach young earth creationism ? me falling on the side of creation is from my own reasoning of the evidence.

I did cell and mutation research for eleven years.

You were reduced to the same rhetoric hollie exhibits,have a good day.

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

She has a point.

Do you yourself a favor read through the thread the proof is in the thread
. You are agreeing with a troll.

 

[Big_D]

Was the flood caused by salt water or fresh water ? The salt content was high enough on the ocean floors that the rain did not dilute it enough to where salt water organisms couldn't survive.

If that were the case then the animals that need salt water and to be near the surface, like some mammals do to breathe, would not survive.

That would be my best guess or the supernatural creator had something to do with it. Don't know was not there.

I have no problem if you want to look at it that way but if this is going to be taught in schools then this will have to be address from a logical side and not a spiritual side.

The climate is not that important. The creator gave most all organisms the ability to adapt to our surroundings but there are limits to being able to adapt.

What do you think the climate was like in the ark that would prevent animals from surviving the boat ride ?

Could Antarctic penguins survive the same temperature as a desert turtle?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Must I provide you with others holding degrees in the sciences that are young earth creationist ? does the University of Arizona teach young earth creationism ? me falling on the side of creation is from my own reasoning of the evidence.

I did cell and mutation research for eleven years.

You were reduced to the same rhetoric hollie exhibits,have a good day.

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

She has a point.

You can also read and respond to my mutation argument. You can read and respond to my genetics argument. You can read and respond to my amino acid argument. Plus many more. You can also respond to questions put to you. I can defend my views but can the counterpart do the same.

 

[Hollie]

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

She has a point.

Do you yourself a favor read through the thread the proof is in the thread
. You are agreeing with a troll.

It's a shame that you're reduced to juvenile name-calling as opposed to actually presenting verifiable facts for a 6000 year old earth

 

[Hollie]

Oh cool. We have the claims of an anonymous poster on an internet message board who claims to have done “research”.

Do you also command the French forces at Waterloo?

She has a point.

You can also read and respond to my mutation argument. You can read and respond to my genetics argument. You can read and respond to my amino acid argument. Plus many more. You can also respond to questions put to you. I can defend my views but can the counterpart do the same.

Let's be honest. The arguments you claim as yours are not yours at all. The "arguments" are videos produced by creationist ministries such as the ICR and remarkably, Harun Yahya. You do nothing more than post videos and demand others "refute" them.

It's a nonsensical tactic but one you have tried incessantly.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Was the flood caused by salt water or fresh water ? The salt content was high enough on the ocean floors that the rain did not dilute it enough to where salt water organisms couldn't survive.

If that were the case then the animals that need salt water and to be near the surface, like some mammals do to breathe, would not survive.

That would be my best guess or the supernatural creator had something to do with it. Don't know was not there.

I have no problem if you want to look at it that way but if this is going to be taught in schools then this will have to be address from a logical side and not a spiritual side.

The climate is not that important. The creator gave most all organisms the ability to adapt to our surroundings but there are limits to being able to adapt.

What do you think the climate was like in the ark that would prevent animals from surviving the boat ride ?

Could Antarctic penguins survive the same temperature as a desert turtle?

How do you know they would not survive ?

Same could be said for the faith required to believe that precision in nature is the result of random chance and unguided processes.

Once again I do not have a clue what animals existed at the time of Noah.

 

[Youwerecreated]

She has a point.

You can also read and respond to my mutation argument. You can read and respond to my genetics argument. You can read and respond to my amino acid argument. Plus many more. You can also respond to questions put to you. I can defend my views but can the counterpart do the same.

Let's be honest. The arguments you claim as yours are not yours at all. The "arguments" are videos produced by creationist ministries such as the ICR and remarkably, Harun Yahya. You do nothing more than post videos and demand others "refute" them.

It's a nonsensical tactic but one you have tried incessantly.

I did not post any videos on my main arguments they were unlike you in my own words.