The Belief That Life Was the Result of an Accident Is Unscientific

joining elements in an Ehrenmeyer Flask to form amino acids.....

Not an Erlenmeyer flask,

MU_apparatus.jpg


This is an Erlenmeyer flask

H-4917.250.png
 
And yet all we are are an assembly of atoms.
Which means atoms like Beethoven. At least most atoms.
Why?

moebius-ants.jpg
Nice picture of a bunch of atoms.
Atoms that will exist long after we die.
Atoms have nothing in the game. A carbon atom does not care if it is in my nose or on my desk. It will be around a thousand years from now.
 
So you believe there is something beyond matter which is life?
Seems obvious there is something called life. All life is based on matter but not all matter is alive, again obvious.

I've never encountered life that was not composed of matter, have you?
Ah, now are getting somewhere.
Yes, there is something that is not matter that is life, but uses matter.
 
...but they love to pretend that Darwin's theory is a fact.

It isn't.
Evolution is a fact, we can see it but that doesn't change anything, the evidence is overwhelming. We can't see the atoms that compose us and likely never will, but does anyone doubt they exist?
 
And yet all we are are an assembly of atoms.
Which means atoms like Beethoven. At least most atoms.
Why?

moebius-ants.jpg
Nice picture of a bunch of atoms.
Atoms that will exist long after we die.
Atoms have nothing in the game. A carbon atom does not care if it is in my nose or on my desk. It will be around a thousand years from now.

Matter cannot be created or destroyed
Life can
Can life be destroyed?
Life is not matter.
Unless of course you think atoms play the harmonica.
 
Are you circuitously trying to talk about Jung's Theory of Anima and Animus?
 
...but they love to pretend that Darwin's theory is a fact.

It isn't.
Evolution is a fact, we can see it but that doesn't change anything, the evidence is overwhelming. We can't see the atoms that compose us and likely never will, but does anyone doubt they exist?
Why did life begin at only one single point in time according to evolutionists?
Why are we not seeing new life emerging from the mud today? You can't blame time, your beginning of life happened long ago, and time keeps on ticking.
evolution.png
 
Ah, now are getting somewhere.
Yes, there is something that is not matter that is life, but uses matter.
Life is inseparable from matter. Although many here might not agree, if you are a Democrat you are a human being even if not all human beings are Democrats.
 
Ah, now are getting somewhere.
Yes, there is something that is not matter that is life, but uses matter.
Life is inseparable from matter. Although many here might not agree, if you are a Democrat you are a human being even if not all human beings are Democrats.
How do you know life is inseparable from matter? There are so many cases of life after death experiences where people describe events around their bodies that many emergency rooms now have markers in the room in the hopes one of these events the person can identify the marker.
 
Why did life begin at only one single point in time according to evolutionists?
Why are we not seeing new life emerging from the mud today? You can't blame time, your beginning of life happened long ago, and time keeps on ticking.
Because you have it backwards. Evolutionists don't claim that life begin at only one single point in time, they claim that all living things we see today and just about every fossil we've ever found can be traced back to the same ancestral population. Life man have begun many times but it appears there was only one winner. Possibly a fusion of multiple early life forms.

It is not impossible for new life to emerge from the mud today, just highly unlikely. Conditions are vastly different and there are hungry plants and animals already here.
 
Why did life begin at only one single point in time according to evolutionists?
Why are we not seeing new life emerging from the mud today? You can't blame time, your beginning of life happened long ago, and time keeps on ticking.
Because you have it backwards. Evolutionists don't claim that life begin at only one single point in time, they claim that all living things we see today and just about every fossil we've ever found can be traced back to the same ancestral population. Life man have begun many times but it appears there was only one winner. Possibly a fusion of multiple early life forms.

It is not impossible for new life to emerge from the mud today, just highly unlikely. Conditions are vastly different and there are hungry plants and animals already here.
So you are claiming that every evolution tree is wrong? That new life is emerging in mud as you read this?
What's your evidence that everyone is wrong but you?
 

Forum List

Back
Top