Not Darwin's Law, it's God's Law.

[Boss]

The "monkeys and chimps" nonsense must have come from your studies at Sunday school, certainly not from an academic background. You should demand a refund of your tuition from the Falwell madrassah.

You just further embarrass yourself with such cluelessness.

Well your academic science neanderthals actually go it one better, toots! They believe we all ultimately came from a single living cell. So all the corn and cockroaches are your cousins!

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

 

[Boss]

* (Hint) the physiology enables the Spirit ...

Of course it does, what else would?

 

[Hollie]

The "monkeys and chimps" nonsense must have come from your studies at Sunday school, certainly not from an academic background. You should demand a refund of your tuition from the Falwell madrassah.

You just further embarrass yourself with such cluelessness.

Well your academic science neanderthals actually go it one better, toots! They believe we all ultimately came from a single living cell. So all the corn and cockroaches are your cousins!

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

 

[BreezeWood]

* (Hint) the physiology enables the Spirit ...

Of course it does, what else would?

.

it's you, Pious that ridicules Fauna - good luck with the Creator ....

.

 

[Boss]

The "monkeys and chimps" nonsense must have come from your studies at Sunday school, certainly not from an academic background. You should demand a refund of your tuition from the Falwell madrassah.

You just further embarrass yourself with such cluelessness.

Well your academic science neanderthals actually go it one better, toots! They believe we all ultimately came from a single living cell. So all the corn and cockroaches are your cousins!

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

 

[Boss]

* (Hint) the physiology enables the Spirit ...

Of course it does, what else would?

.

it's you, Pious that ridicules Fauna - good luck with the Creator ....

.

Nice bug picture but you haven't explained how I ridiculed Fauna. You said "physiology enables the spirit" and I said "of course it does, what else would?" So I agree with you but then you accuse me of being pious and ridiculing Fauna.

 

[Hollie]

The "monkeys and chimps" nonsense must have come from your studies at Sunday school, certainly not from an academic background. You should demand a refund of your tuition from the Falwell madrassah.

You just further embarrass yourself with such cluelessness.

Well your academic science neanderthals actually go it one better, toots! They believe we all ultimately came from a single living cell. So all the corn and cockroaches are your cousins!

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

Your studies at the Harun Yahya Institute leave you as a poor candidate for critique of the biological sciences. Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics. Not surprising as Harun Yahya steals ruthlessly from fundie christian ministries.

Really, shortstop. You need some new material.

 

[Boss]

Well your academic science neanderthals actually go it one better, toots! They believe we all ultimately came from a single living cell. So all the corn and cockroaches are your cousins!

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

Your studies at the Harun Yahya Institute leave you as a poor candidate for critique of the biological sciences. Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics. Not surprising as Harun Yahya steals ruthlessly from fundie christian ministries.

Really, shortstop. You need some new material.

Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics.
LMAO...

Biogenesis - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.[1][2] This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.

Science 1 -- Hollie 0

 

[Hollie]

Typically pointless, but of course, all organic life has shared biology.

You should try becoming acquainted with academia, shortstop. Your lack of a science vocabulary that you announce in a public forum would be cause for less ridicule pointed in your direction.

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

Your studies at the Harun Yahya Institute leave you as a poor candidate for critique of the biological sciences. Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics. Not surprising as Harun Yahya steals ruthlessly from fundie christian ministries.

Really, shortstop. You need some new material.

Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics.
LMAO...

Biogenesis - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.[1][2] This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.

Science 1 -- Hollie 0

You get your "science" from Wiki.

Bossy + Harun Yahya = 0.

 

[Boss]

LMAO... Oh okay... so it's alright to believe we came from the same single genetic cell but academically illiterate to believe we came from primates?

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

Your studies at the Harun Yahya Institute leave you as a poor candidate for critique of the biological sciences. Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics. Not surprising as Harun Yahya steals ruthlessly from fundie christian ministries.

Really, shortstop. You need some new material.

Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics.
LMAO...

Biogenesis - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.[1][2] This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.

Science 1 -- Hollie 0

You get your "science" from Wiki.

Bossy + Harun Yahya = 0.

Nah, I can cite hundreds of sources for Louis Pasteur's remarkable and epic discovery. Wiki was just the quickest. I am really stunned that someone who professes to be all about the science as you have, would not be aware of this basic law of biology. I'll bet the average 5th grader knows this.

 

[Hollie]

Well first, you should attempt to move beyond your 5th grade level of science vocabulary. You should know that there is no such thing as a "Law of Biogenesis" in science. That's just a snappy slogan that you found at your Harun Yahya ministries. Now, it is true that nobody has actually observed first hand the genesis of life from non-living material (i.e., abiogenesis). However, just because something is unobserved certainly does not automatically imply that it cannot, or did not happen.

While likely not as authoritative as Harun Yahya, there was a good three part series on biochemical evolution in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) which argues strongly in favor of abiogenesis as a process of chemistry.

Biochemical evolution I: Polymerization on internal, organophilic silica surfaces of dealuminated zeolites and feldspars, J.V. Smith, PNAS 95(7): 3370-3375, March 31 1998; Biochemical evolution II: Origin of life in tubular microstructures on weathered feldspar surfaces, I. Parsons et al., PNAS 95(26): 15173-15176, December 22 1998; Biochemical evolution III: Polymerization on organophilic silica-rich surfaces, crystal-chemical modeling, formation of first cells, and geological clues, J.V. Smith et al., PNAS 96(7): 3479-3485, March 30 1999].

And yeah, PNAS is a collection of those Evilutionists you hyper-religious folks love to hate.

 

[Hollie]

Why have you never bothered to actually study the data?

There is no data to study. If there were, you'd be presenting it every time someone dared to mention creationism. I've read books and articles, watched documentaries on the various theories. Interesting stuff, but I understand these are theories and not facts. When National Geographic says we all evolved from reptiles who climbed out of the primordial soup 2 million years ago, a lot of people believe it because.. hey... Nat Geo said it! But in Science you have to support theories with evidence.

There is no evidence that single cell organisms ever evolved into multicellular organisms, nor is there evidence that cross-genus speciation has ever happened. There is also no evidence for spontaneous generation of life, in fact, that theory defies Science and the Law of Biogenesis.

Your studies at the Harun Yahya Institute leave you as a poor candidate for critique of the biological sciences. Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics. Not surprising as Harun Yahya steals ruthlessly from fundie christian ministries.

Really, shortstop. You need some new material.

Similarly your "law of Biogenesis" is some crackpot notion you stole from fundamentalist Christian apologetics.
LMAO...

Biogenesis - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.[1][2] This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.

Science 1 -- Hollie 0

You get your "science" from Wiki.

Bossy + Harun Yahya = 0.

Nah, I can cite hundreds of sources for Louis Pasteur's remarkable and epic discovery. Wiki was just the quickest. I am really stunned that someone who professes to be all about the science as you have, would not be aware of this basic law of biology. I'll bet the average 5th grader knows this.

Creationist claims about Pasteur and SpontaneousGeneration

Louis Pasteur
Outstanding scientist and opponent of evolution (1822-1895)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1221.asp

Pasteur's work should have dealt the death blow to the idea of spontaneous generation. But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution. Despite all the efforts of evolutionary scientists, not one observable case of spontaneous generation has ever been found. Pasteur's findings conflicted with the idea of spontaneous generation (as do all scientific results since). Consequently, Louis Pasteur was a strong opponent of Darwin's theory.

 

[Boss]

Now, it is true that nobody has actually observed first hand the genesis of life from non-living material (i.e., abiogenesis). However, just because something is unobserved certainly does not automatically imply that it cannot, or did not happen.

Now wait just a damn minute... how can YOU lay claim to the "supernatural magic" of spontaneous generation, with no observable science whatsoever, but I can't do the same? Sounds like you kind of have a double standard thing going here.

Fact of the matter is, until we observe it happen, we can't claim that it's valid scientifically. I don't really care how many theories you post, or how many various opinions about abiogenesis. I can present just as many theories and opinions regarding creationism.

And no... The Law of Biogenesis is NOT a phrase coined by the religious, it is a well-established and sound scientific principle which is the basis for all of biology and has NEVER been refuted.

 

[Boss]

But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution.

This is also false. Darwin's theories are regarding the changes in organisms which already exist. He makes no claims as to how organisms originate. Science once thought that spontaneous generation was possible, but Pasteur proved this was not the case. Spontaneous generation is an essential part of ABIOGENESIS theory, which necessarily contradicts Scientific principle. In other words, "Magic!"

 

[BreezeWood]

* (Hint) the physiology enables the Spirit ...

Of course it does, what else would?

.

it's you, Pious that ridicules Fauna - good luck with the Creator ....

.

Nice bug picture but you haven't explained how I ridiculed Fauna. You said "physiology enables the spirit" and I said "of course it does, what else would?" So I agree with you but then you accuse me of being pious and ridiculing Fauna.

.

.
"Nice bug picture" = how I ridiculed Fauna - - > boss

that's how Pious, you have no respect, your vision is impaired.

bossy: Even in the instances you propose, where modern man conducts ceremonial ritual without a spiritual component, you have to realize the spiritual component is still there.

"... you have to realize the spiritual component is still there"

pot calling the kettle black ...

You said "physiology enables the spirit" and I said "of course it does ..."

- are you saying Claudius above has no physiology or the physiology has no Spirit ?


* either way bossy, happy mortality.

.

 

[Hollie]

Now, it is true that nobody has actually observed first hand the genesis of life from non-living material (i.e., abiogenesis). However, just because something is unobserved certainly does not automatically imply that it cannot, or did not happen.

Now wait just a damn minute... how can YOU lay claim to the "supernatural magic" of spontaneous generation, with no observable science whatsoever, but I can't do the same? Sounds like you kind of have a double standard thing going here.

Fact of the matter is, until we observe it happen, we can't claim that it's valid scientifically. I don't really care how many theories you post, or how many various opinions about abiogenesis. I can present just as many theories and opinions regarding creationism.

And no... The Law of Biogenesis is NOT a phrase coined by the religious, it is a well-established and sound scientific principle which is the basis for all of biology and has NEVER been refuted.

Such melodrama, shortstop. Hey, by your skewed, twisted "fundie logic", we have to dismiss that weird theory of gravity because we cannot observe it.

Really, shortstop, try and get past your 5th grade education level in the sciences.

And sorry, but your fundamentalist religious beliefs replete with magical spirit realms aren't a counter to the physical sciences.

So yes, you can present all the nonsensical claims to ID'iot creationism you wish. However, we in the rational world (to exclude you supernaturalists), understand that ID'iot creationism is nothing more than a religious claim and totally lacking support.

BTW, your nonsensical "law of biogenesis" that you stole from your fundamentalist creation ministries is a laughable joke that only you spirit realm'ists take seriously.

 

[Hollie]

But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution.

This is also false. Darwin's theories are regarding the changes in organisms which already exist. He makes no claims as to how organisms originate. Science once thought that spontaneous generation was possible, but Pasteur proved this was not the case. Spontaneous generation is an essential part of ABIOGENESIS theory, which necessarily contradicts Scientific principle. In other words, "Magic!"

Really, shortstop. Pay attention.

The quote: "But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution,"

Is a part of the nonsense perpetuated by your ID'iot creationism heroes at Answers in Genesis.

 

[Boss]

* (Hint) the physiology enables the Spirit ...

Of course it does, what else would?

.

it's you, Pious that ridicules Fauna - good luck with the Creator ....

.

Nice bug picture but you haven't explained how I ridiculed Fauna. You said "physiology enables the spirit" and I said "of course it does, what else would?" So I agree with you but then you accuse me of being pious and ridiculing Fauna.

.

.
"Nice bug picture" = how I ridiculed Fauna - - > boss

that's how Pious, you have no respect, your vision is impaired.

Huh? Telling you that I think your bug picture is nice is not being disrespectful mate. My vision shows me a very majestic-looking gold colored bug... is this one of those pictures you have to stare at a long time to see the 'real' image? If so, I have never been good at those, I apologize.

I'm not being pious at all, I think God did a magnificent job creating this bug. It's beautiful and I'll bet it is every bit as functional as it is pretty. Something this magnificent didn't just pop into existence on a fluke or lark. It didn't come to be "just because."

bossy: Even in the instances you propose, where modern man conducts ceremonial ritual without a spiritual component, you have to realize the spiritual component is still there.

"... you have to realize the spiritual component is still there"

pot calling the kettle black ...

Huh??? I'm a pot calling a kettle black because I point out to someone that a graduation or promotion ceremony has a spiritual component even though it is not considered a spiritual ritual? ...You've completely lost me on how I am being hypocritical.

You said "physiology enables the spirit" and I said "of course it does ..."

- are you saying Claudius above has no physiology or the physiology has no Spirit ?

* either way bossy, happy mortality.
.

Has physiology, don't know if it has enabled spirituality... it's possible.

Remember, Breeze... I have previously acknowledged that what you believe is a very distinct possibility. I cannot argue that other life is devoid of spiritual connection. Indeed, it does make rational sense to me that other life would certainly have some connection to the spiritual Creator. I have never disputed you on that, yet you continue to attack me unmercifully on these threads, as if I had called your mother a whore or something. I'm not getting it.

 

[Boss]

But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution.

This is also false. Darwin's theories are regarding the changes in organisms which already exist. He makes no claims as to how organisms originate. Science once thought that spontaneous generation was possible, but Pasteur proved this was not the case. Spontaneous generation is an essential part of ABIOGENESIS theory, which necessarily contradicts Scientific principle. In other words, "Magic!"

Really, shortstop. Pay attention.

The quote: "But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution,"

Is a part of the nonsense perpetuated by your ID'iot creationism heroes at Answers in Genesis.

Well I don't know about that because I don't keep up with what religious groups say. I was simply commenting that the statement was not correct. So I guess the bible-thumpers are wrong, toots..

 

[Hollie]

But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution.

This is also false. Darwin's theories are regarding the changes in organisms which already exist. He makes no claims as to how organisms originate. Science once thought that spontaneous generation was possible, but Pasteur proved this was not the case. Spontaneous generation is an essential part of ABIOGENESIS theory, which necessarily contradicts Scientific principle. In other words, "Magic!"

Really, shortstop. Pay attention.

The quote: "But spontaneous generation is an essential part of the theory of evolution,"

Is a part of the nonsense perpetuated by your ID'iot creationism heroes at Answers in Genesis.

Well I don't know about that because I don't keep up with what religious groups say. I was simply commenting that the statement was not correct. So I guess the bible-thumpers are wrong, toots..

I suppose you are the inventor of your own "Religion of Magical Spirit Realms".

Actually, you should keep up with what religious groups say because your attempts at argument are not only consistent with the christian fundamentalists, they are identical, shortstop.