Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
so show me the tests where it has been proven not viable? not the opining of people how suffer the same delusion you do.The thing is Daws, Abiogenesis has never been a viable theory nor will it be but knowing that you continue to use faulty information so you can say you answered my questions.
I have answered your so called questions, what part of you have no evidence and you've already come to a false conclusion about them do you not understand.?
fact! we all know that! the real problem here is ywc and others like him have settled on an answer they can not prove: "god did it" based on belife: "god exists" also unprovable.Well thanks but its just hilarious to see your failed attempts at pick and choose christianity.
Fact ! cells reproduce cells the question is how was it possible for the first cell to form ?
so the real question is: why do people like ywc pretend to have proof when it's obvious they do not?
proof of your willful ignorance..A claim you make completely absent a shred of evidence.
I was in the science community for many years that is proof enough for me.
We have no evidence for supernaturalism or supermagicalism.Here are a few for you to think over.
1. life being formed of non living matter.
2. precision in nature.
3. A planet possessing the things necessary for life.
4. properly aligned planets.
5. Atmosphere that protects us in many ways.
6. the sun.
7. the moon.
8. the genetic code, a language.
9. Dna information
10. the formation of a cell.
Plenty more.
There is nothing to indicate supernaturalism or supermagicalism in the above.
How do you know hollie ?
Reminds me the Human Genome Project where Mitochodrial Eve was found, dating back some 6000 years. It's as if the Scientists were scratching up the side of this mountain only to reach the top and finding the Theologians who'd been there all along. But that still doesn't mean you can watch the Flintstones and think of it as a documentary.
__________________
A claim you make completely absent a shred of evidence.
Ya, I asked WHAT the scientists have dismissed that is proof of design? Got anything at all? or did you just make that up because you felt like it?
Here are a few for you to think over.
1. life being formed of non living matter.
2. precision in nature.
3. A planet possessing the things necessary for life.
4. properly aligned planets.
5. Atmosphere that protects us in many ways.
6. the sun.
7. the moon.
8. the genetic code, a language.
9. Dna information
10. the formation of a cell.
Plenty more.
Your charges are obviously false. There is a remarkably complete fosill record of human ancestry.Reminds me the Human Genome Project where Mitochodrial Eve was found, dating back some 6000 years. It's as if the Scientists were scratching up the side of this mountain only to reach the top and finding the Theologians who'd been there all along. But that still doesn't mean you can watch the Flintstones and think of it as a documentary.
__________________
At first they suggested she came from Africa 150,000 to 200,000 years ago and she was not completely human.
That is a problem for the theory because they want you to believe humans came from Africa millions of years ago.
Notice how all evidence that does not fit their theory it disappears and or gets swept under the carpet.
That is how the Ideologues operate that are the heads of the science community.
Your charges are obviously false. There is a remarkably complete fosill record of human ancestry.Reminds me the Human Genome Project where Mitochodrial Eve was found, dating back some 6000 years. It's as if the Scientists were scratching up the side of this mountain only to reach the top and finding the Theologians who'd been there all along. But that still doesn't mean you can watch the Flintstones and think of it as a documentary.
__________________
At first they suggested she came from Africa 150,000 to 200,000 years ago and she was not completely human.
That is a problem for the theory because they want you to believe humans came from Africa millions of years ago.
Notice how all evidence that does not fit their theory it disappears and or gets swept under the carpet.
That is how the Ideologues operate that are the heads of the science community.
Your silly claims of evidence being swept under the carpet is desperation on your part to ignore the science discoveries.
Your charges are obviously false. There is a remarkably complete fosill record of human ancestry.Reminds me the Human Genome Project where Mitochodrial Eve was found, dating back some 6000 years. It's as if the Scientists were scratching up the side of this mountain only to reach the top and finding the Theologians who'd been there all along. But that still doesn't mean you can watch the Flintstones and think of it as a documentary.
__________________
At first they suggested she came from Africa 150,000 to 200,000 years ago and she was not completely human.
That is a problem for the theory because they want you to believe humans came from Africa millions of years ago.
Notice how all evidence that does not fit their theory it disappears and or gets swept under the carpet.
That is how the Ideologues operate that are the heads of the science community.
Your silly claims of evidence being swept under the carpet is desperation on your part to ignore the science discoveries.
really? you have no evidence of magic or god..sure I get it since you have nothing real then it has to be magic....You don't get it magic was needed for it to happen.
Since you can't make a logical rebuttal my view is better supported by the evidence.
really? you have no evidence of magic or god..sure I get it since you have nothing real then it has to be magic....
Since you can't make a logical rebuttal my view is better supported by the evidence.
Definition of LOGIC
1a (1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning (2) : a branch or variety of logic <modal logic> <Boolean logic> (3) : a branch of semiotics; especially : syntactics (4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge b (1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty (2) : relevance, propriety c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable
who the fuck are you to talk about soundiing like an ideologue Definition of IDEOLOGUEloloolololololol creationist bullshit ...it's destroyed nothing and proven nothingIf you would like to read his complete and utter destruction of another theory you cling to.
Abiogenic Origin of Life:
A theory in crisis
2005 Arthur v. Chadewick Ph.D
Professor of Geology and Biology
as stated before: their aguments, like yours are not valid as you have no evidence proving your basic premise : god exists.
if and untill that happens everything you believe to proof is conjecture. get it
Please explain the phenomenon without sounding like an Ideologue. That is exactly what creationist have done.
I would add they had no language or context or concept to give an accurate description of certain events.really? you have no evidence of magic or god..Since you can't make a logical rebuttal my view is better supported by the evidence.
Definition of LOGIC
1a (1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning (2) : a branch or variety of logic <modal logic> <Boolean logic> (3) : a branch of semiotics; especially : syntactics (4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge b (1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty (2) : relevance, propriety c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable
I don't believe in magic, but I do believe the people of old saw something they had no way to describe with the technology available at the time.
I would add they had no language or context or concept to give an accurate description of certain events.really? you have no evidence of magic or god..
Definition of LOGIC
1a (1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning (2) : a branch or variety of logic <modal logic> <Boolean logic> (3) : a branch of semiotics; especially : syntactics (4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge b (1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty (2) : relevance, propriety c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable
I don't believe in magic, but I do believe the people of old saw something they had no way to describe with the technology available at the time.
Humanity is evolving away from mythologies, that much is clear. Religious beliefs have nowhere near the power and clout they used to, and as science progresses forward, the god of the gaps pleadings get thinner and thinner. Once, the gods opened every flower, now, they're reduced to being bureaucrats. One day, that too will be taken away from them as they are merely myths and always have been. Will it be borne out? Speculatively, everything we've learned so far shows that the theisms are simply poetic perceptions of existence, important for their time, less relevant as we progress and learn the truth about existence. So yes, eventually when we come to the finish line of what is Truth, the natural explanation will reign supreme.I would add they had no language or context or concept to give an accurate description of certain events.I don't believe in magic, but I do believe the people of old saw something they had no way to describe with the technology available at the time.
For instance, of all the stories the one about Noah and the ark makes far more sense to me as a DNA bank than a guy running around rounding up two of everything and keeping them from eating each other all that time. Panspermia maybe. We can't be all that's out there.
Plus, in the book of Lamech (a book that didn't make it into our Bible) it tells of Lamech coming home after being gone for a long time to find his wife pregnant. Knowing it wasn't his he went to his father, Methuselah and Methuselah couldn't help him so he goes to his great grandfather who was Enoch and Enoch more or less tells him its an artificial insemination. That baby was Noah.
Now in the Bible it says Noah 'was pure in all his generations'. So I ask you, where did such a story come from?
Humanity is evolving away from mythologies, that much is clear. Religious beliefs have nowhere near the power and clout they used to, and as science progresses forward, the god of the gaps pleadings get thinner and thinner. Once, the gods opened every flower, now, they're reduced to being bureaucrats. One day, that too will be taken away from them as they are merely myths and always have been. Will it be borne out? Speculatively, everything we've learned so far shows that the theisms are simply poetic perceptions of existence, important for their time, less relevant as we progress and learn the truth about existence. So yes, eventually when we come to the finish line of what is Truth, the natural explanation will reign supreme.I would add they had no language or context or concept to give an accurate description of certain events.
For instance, of all the stories the one about Noah and the ark makes far more sense to me as a DNA bank than a guy running around rounding up two of everything and keeping them from eating each other all that time. Panspermia maybe. We can't be all that's out there.
Plus, in the book of Lamech (a book that didn't make it into our Bible) it tells of Lamech coming home after being gone for a long time to find his wife pregnant. Knowing it wasn't his he went to his father, Methuselah and Methuselah couldn't help him so he goes to his great grandfather who was Enoch and Enoch more or less tells him its an artificial insemination. That baby was Noah.
Now in the Bible it says Noah 'was pure in all his generations'. So I ask you, where did such a story come from?
Humanity is evolving away from mythologies, that much is clear. Religious beliefs have nowhere near the power and clout they used to, and as science progresses forward, the god of the gaps pleadings get thinner and thinner. Once, the gods opened every flower, now, they're reduced to being bureaucrats. One day, that too will be taken away from them as they are merely myths and always have been. Will it be borne out? Speculatively, everything we've learned so far shows that the theisms are simply poetic perceptions of existence, important for their time, less relevant as we progress and learn the truth about existence. So yes, eventually when we come to the finish line of what is Truth, the natural explanation will reign supreme.I would add they had no language or context or concept to give an accurate description of certain events.
For instance, of all the stories the one about Noah and the ark makes far more sense to me as a DNA bank than a guy running around rounding up two of everything and keeping them from eating each other all that time. Panspermia maybe. We can't be all that's out there.
Plus, in the book of Lamech (a book that didn't make it into our Bible) it tells of Lamech coming home after being gone for a long time to find his wife pregnant. Knowing it wasn't his he went to his father, Methuselah and Methuselah couldn't help him so he goes to his great grandfather who was Enoch and Enoch more or less tells him its an artificial insemination. That baby was Noah.
Now in the Bible it says Noah 'was pure in all his generations'. So I ask you, where did such a story come from?
