Loch Ness monster cited by US schools as evidence that evolution is myth

[Haiti's Space Agency]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/odd/loch-ness-monster-cited-by-us-schools-as-evidence-that-evolution-is-myth-1-2373903

THOUSANDS of American school pupils are to be taught that the Loch Ness monster is real – in an attempt by religious teachers to disprove Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Pupils attending privately-run Christian schools in the southern state of Louisiana will learn from textbooks next year, which claim Scotland’s most famous mythological beast is a living creature.

Thousands of children are to receive publicly-funded vouchers enabling them to attend the schools – which follow a strict fundamentalist curriculum.

The Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) programme teaches controversial religious beliefs, aimed at disproving evolution and proving creationism.

Youngsters will be told that if it can be proved that dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time as man, then Darwinism is fatally flawed.

Critics have slammed the content of the religious course books, labelling them “bizarre” and accusing them of promoting radical religious and political ideas.

One ACE textbook called Biology 1099, Accelerated Christian Education Inc reads: “Are dinosaurs alive today? Scientists are becoming more convinced of their existence.

“Have you heard of the Loch Ness Monster in Scotland? ‘Nessie’ for short has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.”

Another claim taught is that a Japanese whaling boat once caught a dinosaur.

One former pupil, Jonny Scaramanga, 27, who went through the ACE programme as a child, but now campaigns against Christian fundamentalism, said the Nessie claim was presented as “evidence” that evolution could not have happened.

He added: “The reason for that is they’re saying if Noah’s flood only happened 4,000 years ago, which they believe literally happened, then possibly a sea monster survived.

USA USA USA USA

[Zanick]

This will only happen if parents want it to, the private schools don't get funding from taxes. I feel bad for the kids, though.

[reject]

We should have killed our fundamentalist Christians all those years ago rather than let them sail across the ocean and settle in America.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[Psych]

This will only happen if parents want it to, the private schools don't get funding from taxes. I feel bad for the kids, though.

children are to receive publicly-funded vouchers

So yea, your taxes are paying for it.

[Zanick]

We should have killed our fundamentalist Christians all those years ago rather than let them sail across the ocean and settle in America.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Wow, I'm glad you have no authority in such matters because the most backwards fundies I know would never do that to you.

[reject]

They would, they're fuckin crazy and want to kill all heathens, aka anyone who isn't crazy like them.

[Zanick]

boo hoo, all I hear is two pigs that hate one another. their oinks sound exactly alike.

[-SpectraL]

The Evolution theory is nothing but a joke. It sounds plausible on the surface, but when you actually break it down into its infinitesimal components, you quickly begin to discover how ludicrous, illogical, senseless and grasping it really is.

Here's the Evolution Theory in a nutshell:

There is some trees in the forest. The trees in the forest will become a house. The trees, over millions of years, somehow transform themselves/create themselves into planks. Another 100 million years pass and the boards somehow arrange themselves into the shape of a house. Millions more years pass and somehow the house develops rooms, doorways, windows, a roof complete with shingles, cupboards, stairs and even a finished bathroom. Now, you may ask, "How the hell did the trees become a house if the trees weren't intelligent enough to become a house in the first place?". According to the Evolution Theory, the trees were able to overcome the lack of intelligence through need. Because the trees could become a house they eventually had to become a house.

But anybody in their right mind knows that a forest full of trees will NEVER become a house on their own. You could wait one thousand million gazillion years and it will still be a forest, not a house. It takes an intelligent component in order to get the trees in the forest to transform into a house. Now, sure, some dipshit moron could simply insist the trees in the forest CAN transform into a house by themselves given enough time and enough opportunity, but any sane person knows that's nothing but a bunch of complete self-serving bullshit.

[Rust]

boo hoo, all I hear is two pigs that hate one another. their oinks sound exactly alike.

Yeah, whenever you see one of those pigs mangling the fucking education of thousands of children in a country, then your awful point might be worth something. Until then their oinks sound nothing alike.

[007GoldenShower]

Rammstein - Amerika - YouTube

[Psych]

The Evolution theory is nothing but a joke. It sounds plausible on the surface, but when you actually break it down into its infinitesimal components, you quickly begin to discover how ludicrous, illogical, senseless and grasping it really is.

Here's the Evolution Theory in a nutshell:

There is some trees in the forest. The trees in the forest will become a house. The trees, over millions of years, somehow transform themselves/create themselves into planks. Another 100 million years pass and the boards somehow arrange themselves into the shape of a house. Millions more years pass and somehow the house develops rooms, doorways, windows, a roof complete with shingles, cupboards, stairs and even a finished bathroom. Now, you may ask, "How the hell did the trees become a house if the trees weren't intelligent enough to become a house in the first place?". According to the Evolution Theory, the trees were able to overcome the lack of intelligence through need. Because the trees could become a house they eventually had to become a house.

But anybody in their right mind knows that a forest full of trees will NEVER become a house on their own. You could wait one thousand million gazillion years and it will still be a forest, not a house. It takes an intelligent component in order to get the trees in the forest to transform into a house. Now, sure, some dipshit moron could simply insist the trees in the forest CAN transform into a house by themselves given enough time and enough opportunity, but any sane person knows that's nothing but a bunch of complete self-serving bullshit.

:confused: Are you hardcore trollin now? Or do you actually believe that to be an accurate analogy?

[Ph0x]

Spictroll is sooo retarded.

[NamelessNom4d]

:confused: Are you hardcore trollin now? Or do you actually believe that to be an accurate analogy?

My thoughts exactly. I think I lost brain cells just reading that.

By the way we have proof of evolution in a short term, example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus

[constantinople]

It's gonna be funny when those kids get into an argument later in life and make baboons out of themselves arguing that Nessy is a real thing.

[p6867]

My mom just got super into religion after her divorce and now no longer believes in evolution. which is weird because she's a smart, educated woman.

[p6867]

The Evolution theory is nothing but a joke. It sounds plausible on the surface, but when you actually break it down into its infinitesimal components, you quickly begin to discover how ludicrous, illogical, senseless and grasping it really is.

Here's the Evolution Theory in a nutshell:

There is some trees in the forest. The trees in the forest will become a house. The trees, over millions of years, somehow transform themselves/create themselves into planks. Another 100 million years pass and the boards somehow arrange themselves into the shape of a house. Millions more years pass and somehow the house develops rooms, doorways, windows, a roof complete with shingles, cupboards, stairs and even a finished bathroom. Now, you may ask, "How the hell did the trees become a house if the trees weren't intelligent enough to become a house in the first place?". According to the Evolution Theory, the trees were able to overcome the lack of intelligence through need. Because the trees could become a house they eventually had to become a house.

But anybody in their right mind knows that a forest full of trees will NEVER become a house on their own. You could wait one thousand million gazillion years and it will still be a forest, not a house. It takes an intelligent component in order to get the trees in the forest to transform into a house. Now, sure, some dipshit moron could simply insist the trees in the forest CAN transform into a house by themselves given enough time and enough opportunity, but any sane person knows that's nothing but a bunch of complete self-serving bullshit.

I sometimes forget that you are a young earth creationist, just with a different higher power.

You can get fruit flies, breed them in a sealed environment and kill off traits you aren't looking for and literally have a new species of fruit fly this time next year.

It's just nucleic chemical interaction. You're just a sack of chemicals trying to reproduce itself and preserve itself. The scale of 'life' is a joke. We're bacteria, we're pretty much the exact same chemical. Bacteria clump together all the time, your hunk of cells isn't anything special and it certainly isn't directed. Religious folk are just bothered by being just a sack of chemicals interacting, no different than baking soda in vinegar, but they want to be special so it couldn't just be as simple as science makes it out to be, there has to be a higher power directing it, whether god for most people or aliens for spectral, it's just self importance.

[TheSexyBeast821]

I sometimes forget that you are a young earth creationist, just with a different higher power.

You can get fruit flies, breed them in a sealed environment and kill off traits you aren't looking for and literally have a new species of fruit fly this time next year.

It's just nucleic chemical interaction. You're just a sack of chemicals trying to reproduce itself and preserve itself. The scale of 'life' is a joke. We're bacteria, we're pretty much the exact same chemical. Bacteria clump together all the time, your hunk of cells isn't anything special and it certainly isn't directed. Religious folk are just bothered by being just a sack of chemicals interacting, no different than baking soda in vinegar, but they want to be special so it couldn't just be as simple as science makes it out to be, there has to be a higher power directing it, whether god for most people or aliens for spectral, it's just self importance.

The creation of DNA by randomness seems so statistically unlikely that it would be akin to a pile of steel beams erecting themselves into the Eiffel Tower. Now add in intelligence to direct each molecule to be at the right place at the right time, and the creation of DNA doesn't seem like a statistical impossibility.

[Mullen]

My mom just got super into religion after her divorce and now no longer believes in evolution. which is weird because she's a smart, educated woman.

:hrmph:

[Rust]

The creation of DNA by randomness seems so statistically unlikely that it would be akin to a pile of steel beams erecting themselves into the Eiffel Tower. Now add in intelligence to direct each molecule to be at the right place at the right time, and the creation of DNA doesn't seem like a statistical impossibility.

Care to provide the statistical analysis that you did to determine the likelihood of DNA "assembling itself" (whatever the fuck that means)?

Pro-tip: Your ass isn't a source, the laws of biochemistry aren't random, and it is nowhere near analogous to the awful analogy you gave.

[Captain Falcon]

Time for some asian kid to murder/suicide his school again. It takes a Columbine to knock some sense into USA.

[p6867]

The creation of DNA by randomness seems so statistically unlikely that it would be akin to a pile of steel beams erecting themselves into the Eiffel Tower. Now add in intelligence to direct each molecule to be at the right place at the right time, and the creation of DNA doesn't seem like a statistical impossibility.

There are motherfucking trillions of trillions of trillions of planets in a universe that is expanding faster than the speed of light, creating new planets constantly. What are the odds of DNA being created on a planet, are they one in a trillion? because that means it's happened trillions of trillions of times.

Get some perspective on how huge our universe is and how little your DNA or mine matters in it.

And i have some great evidence that nucleic acids first came from the primordial ooze without a directing progenitor, we have no evidence of a progenitor, but we do have RNA and DNA.

That's what always gets me. I don't have an agenda here. I just want to know as much as possible. If there did turn out to be a designer, that would be fucking awesome! The idea of an afterlife, of my consciousness not terminating upon the death of my body would be great. I'm terrified of death in a way that the religious don't understand and finding out that there's more than just this life would be amazing.
Unfortunately there is at this time no evidence that is the case.

[Captain Falcon]

Care to provide the statistical analysis that you did to determine the likelihood of DNA "assembling itself" (whatever the fuck that means)?

Pro-tip: Your ass isn't a source, and the laws of biochemistry aren't random.

Not to mention that even if they were random and the chance was 1/1000000, hot Earth chemistry was so crazy and fast during the formative stages of the planet, it was almost certain one of our self replicating molecules would get made anyway, kind of like rolling a million sided die a billion times. We're liable to at least once get each of the sides, it would be unlikely NOT to with that many iterations.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Care to provide the statistical analysis that you did to determine the likelihood of DNA "assembling itself" (whatever the fuck that means)?

Pro-tip: Your ass isn't a source, the laws of biochemistry aren't random, and the likelihood is nowhere near analogous to the awful analogy you gave.

There are motherfucking trillions of trillions of trillions of planets in a universe that is expanding faster than the speed of light, creating new planets constantly. What are the odds of DNA being created on a planet, are they one in a trillion? because that means it's happened trillions of trillions of times.

Get some perspective on how huge our universe is and how little your DNA or mine matters in it.

And i have some great evidence that nucleic acids first came from the primordial ooze without a directing progenitor, we have no evidence of a progenitor, but we do have RNA and DNA.

That's what always gets me. I don't have an agenda here. I just want to know as much as possible. If there did turn out to be a designer, that would be fucking awesome! The idea of an afterlife, of my consciousness not terminating upon the death of my body would be great. I'm terrified of death in a way that the religious don't understand and finding out that there's more than just this life would be amazing.
Unfortunately there is at this time no evidence that is the case.

DNA is the most complex molecule in our universe. It forming in a functional way is probably the most statistically unlikely event that ever occurred in the universe, even with planets numbering in the trillions. Theist or atheist, I think it qualifies as a miracle.

[ZappaFan]

Dont give that nigga tree fiddy

[Rust]

DNA is the most complex molecule in our universe. It forming in a functional way is probably the most statistically unlikely event that ever occurred in the universe, even with planets numbering in the trillions. Theist or atheist, I think it qualifies as a miracle.

Yeah, repeating bullshit isn't going to make it true. How are you determining the statistical likelihood of that? You're pulling that claim out of your ass.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Yeah, repeating bullshit isn't going to make it true. How are you determining the statistical likelihood of that? You're pulling that claim out of your ass.

Considering no one was alive to witness the conditions surrounding the creation of DNA, all there are is claims in regard to its formation. My claim that the odds of it being created are astronomically^n small is just as valid as any other.

[Captain Falcon]

DNA is the most complex molecule in our universe. It forming in a functional way is probably the most statistically unlikely event that ever occurred in the universe, even with planets numbering in the trillions. Theist or atheist, I think it qualifies as a miracle.

No and we didn't have to directly form DNA, you tard. It could have hit up with simple RNAs and DNA is not the most complicated molecule in the universe, not even fucking close. DNA is something like C232 N92O139P22. On the other hand, we have titin (the protein) at C132983H211861N36149O40883S693 (had to google this, even I can't remember this shit) and that's only one protein, polymers have bazillions of monomers and there are several macromolecules out there.

[Captain Falcon]

Considering no one was alive to witness the conditions surrounding the creation of DNA, all there are is claims in regard to its formation. My claim that the odds of it being created are astronomically^n small is just as valid as any other.

Claims require proof, you tit. If you think throughout the billions of years of existence across the innumerable stars in the cosmos, one self replicating molecule forming is too improbable, you're beyond help.

[p6867]

DNA is the most complex molecule in our universe. It forming in a functional way is probably the most statistically unlikely event that ever occurred in the universe, even with planets numbering in the trillions. Theist or atheist, I think it qualifies as a miracle.

Oh, you don't know a lot of science. I understand now.

[reject]

Religion is what people turn to when they don't understand science.

[sploogook]

Religion is what people turn to when they don't understand science.

this

[Rust]

Considering no one was alive to witness the conditions surrounding the creation of DNA, all there are is claims in regard to its formation. My claim that the odds of it being created are astronomically^n small is just as valid as any other.

If it's just as valid as any other claim, then we can reply your claim with any other claim. It's a wash. That doesn't help you.

That aside, we don't need to witness the conditions surrounding the creation of DNA to make estimates that have fairly reasonable upper and lower bounds on the likelihood of it happening.

You've provided nothing to support the idea that the odds are astronomically small, and have ignored points made that suggest the odds are not as small as you think they are.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Fine, you all can believe in chaos creating life if you want.

[Captain Falcon]

Fine, you all can believe in chaos creating life if you want.

Nobody should let what they "want" to believe interfere with what they SHOULD believe i.e. the truth. The truth is that there's almost certainly no God.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Nobody should let what they "want" to believe interfere with what they SHOULD believe i.e. the truth. The truth is that there's almost certainly no God.

No, the Truth is that there most definitely is a God.

[Captain Falcon]

No, the Truth is that there most definitely is a God.

How many times do you need to be told that you need to back up your statements with proof? Before you try to pull the stupid old "where's your proof?" shit, my proof is that there is absolutely no proof for the existence of a God or Gods. I'd like you to provide me with a single shred of logically consistent proof for the existence of God. Go ahead.

[Rust]

Fine, you all can believe in chaos creating life if you want.

So you're giving us permission now? :yao:

Just so you have no excuse in the future; because it's clearly you currently have no fucking clue what you're talking about:

1. The primitive forms of life that would be relevant in this discussion, would not have DNA as complex as what we observe today. Using DNA as a comparison for "complexity" is extremely misleading.


2. As was already pointed out, this process wouldn't be happening in one or two locations. It would be happening around trillions and trillions of locations all over the universe. It would also not happen once, but continuously. So imagine trillions and trillions of attempts, each of them repeating a trillions and trillions of times.

Nothing close to analogous to a single Eiffel Tower constructing itself.


3. It wouldn't be random. Not only are the laws of biochemistry not random, but the chemical reactions occurring at that time wouldn't be truly random. The nucleosynthesis (i.e. creation of atoms) after the bigbang favors atoms over others, and the conditions at a given planet (e.g. ultraviolet light, lightning) favor certain reactions to others.

Moreover, self-replicating molecules would be selected upon by natural (chemical) selection, which is the opposite of random.

[reject]

Fine, you all can believe in chaos creating life if you want.

Rather that than a magical mystery man in the sky.

[TheSexyBeast821]

How many times do you need to be told that you need to back up your statements with proof? Before you try to pull the stupid old "where's your proof?" shit, my proof is that there is absolutely no proof for the existence of a God or Gods. I'd like you to provide me with a single shred of logically consistent proof for the existence of God. Go ahead.

You haven't looked hard enough for proof, because it exists.

[Bobitis]

Was expecting the Onion, I'm a little disappointed in humanity :(

The creation of DNA by randomness seems so statistically unlikely that it would be akin to a pile of steel beams erecting themselves into the Eiffel Tower. Now add in intelligence to direct each molecule to be at the right place at the right time, and the creation of DNA doesn't seem like a statistical impossibility.

Improbable yes, but not impossible. When you think about the huge numbers involved across the entire universe, almost anything is possible.

Our planet is one of those few that are the right distance from the sun, have the right atmosphere and have water to sustain life. It's almost a little too perfect but that's because at the same time life has been adapting and filling niches, which is what evolution does, to best survive here.

Also when you think of all the planets we've found that don't support life, it shows how improbable it is.

[Proots]

LOL. This is like, some Onion type bullshit right here. I love it.

[bortmackie]

Oh god, not another evolution debate. I think i've just about shouted myself hoarse on this topic. And it never makes any difference. Because they'll just come up with another stupid argument that makes no sense but sounds kinda clever. So if Nessie exists, then Darwinism is flawed because that means dinosaurs and humans are walking the earth at the same time? That doesn't even make any logical sense. It's basically the same "If we descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" argument played out a thousand times every time a creationist can name another animal.

What the fuck is so wrong with the scientific method? Evolution makes total sense, way more than any crackpot theory about a magic man in the sky making it all up. We may not have all the pieces of what descended from what perfectly in place, but the theory behind it is totally valid and has shit tons of real evidence and data to support it.

[Captain Falcon]

You haven't looked hard enough for proof, because it exists.

Please enlighten me oh grand swami because I spent a huge majority of my life clinging to the belief that there was a god because I was scared of my cessation of existence. Once I came to terms with my own death, I didn't see a reason to cling to the hope that the invisible, unfeeling, all knowing, all powerful being existed. There's no "loving" god who would tell you to not do completely inconsequential things and throw you into eternal hellfire because you fucked up during your 70 year lifespan.

[The Pat-Man]

well its a private school so its the parents business

[TheSexyBeast821]

Please enlighten me oh grand swami because I spent a huge majority of my life clinging to the belief that there was a god because I was scared of my cessation of existence. Once I came to terms with my own death, I didn't see a reason to cling to the hope that the invisible, unfeeling, all knowing, all powerful being existed. There's no "loving" god who would tell you to not do completely inconsequential things and throw you into eternal hellfire because you fucked up during your 70 year lifespan.

God loves you, open yourself up to that love. Why would you choose to not always be in love if always being in love were a possibility for your life?

[Captain Falcon]

Oh god, not another evolution debate. I think i've just about shouted myself hoarse on this topic. And it never makes any difference. Because they'll just come up with another stupid argument that makes no sense but sounds kinda clever. So if Nessie exists, then Darwinism is flawed because that means dinosaurs and humans are walking the earth at the same time? That doesn't even make any logical sense. It's basically the same "If we descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" argument played out a thousand times every time a creationist can name another animal.

What the fuck is so wrong with the scientific method? Evolution makes total sense, way more than any crackpot theory about a magic man in the sky making it all up. We may not have all the pieces of what descended from what perfectly in place, but the theory behind it is totally valid and has shit tons of real evidence and data to support it.

I don't think a god and evolution are mutually exclusive, but I do think that the worship or belief in a god will be fruitless and unnecessary. If there's a god, there's definitely no hell. The fuck would god get out of throwing us in hell? Nothing, he's omnipotent. so either god is sadistic (and therefore not God because of imperfect and human attributes like anger) or there's no hell. If there's no god, however, I won't really give a shit when I'm dead.

Personally, the way I dealt with the fear of my own mortality was to arrange to be buried with a seed and then I'd be some sort of natural ass nigga :drool:

[moonturtle]

birds are dinosaurs

that doesn't disprove evolution

the whole thing is retarded

[Captain Falcon]

God loves you, open yourself up to that love. Why would you choose to not always be in love if always being in love were a possibility for your life?

Tell that to this kid:

http://i.imgur.com/abegG.jpg

He must not be opening himself to God enough.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Tell that to this kid:

http://i.imgur.com/abegG.jpg

He must not be opening himself to God enough.

What does food have to do with love? That kid very may well be in a state of ecstasy despite his hunger and undernourishment.

[-SpectraL]

Wickedness and suffering exists only because Satan the Devil has been given complete control of this system of things for an appointed time. There is a limit to that timeframe, and folks, it has finally arrived.

[Rust]

What does food have to do with love? That kid very may well be in a state of ecstasy despite his hunger and undernourishment.

:lulz:

[TheSexyBeast821]

:lulz:

I've experienced ecstasies while in the grips of despondency, and I've experienced ecstasies while fasting. Sure the love of God isn't filling his belly, but perhaps it is filling his soul.

[reject]

Wickedness and suffering exists only because Satan the Devil has been given complete control of this system of things for an appointed time. There is a limit to that timeframe, and folks, it has finally arrived.

You need to look up the Good Guy Lucifer memes and realise that in the Bible he is the good character and God is the bad guy who brings death, hatred and destruction.

[Captain Falcon]

What does food have to do with love? That kid very may well be in a state of ecstasy despite his hunger and undernourishment.

:lulz:

nuff sed

[Rust]

http://i.imgur.com/abegG.jpg

...fasting...

:lol:

[TheSexyBeast821]

I don't know why you guys cite a starving child in Africa as a reason to not experience divine love in your own lives. Feel like you don't deserve it or something?

[Rust]

I'm just laughing at you comparing a child starving to death (to the point that he looks like he came directly out of Auschwitz), to some hippy-dippy "fasting" you did to reach enlightment. :lulz:

[TheSexyBeast821]

I'm just laughing at you comparing a child starving to death (to the point that he looks like he came directly out of Auschwitz), to some hippy-dippy "fasting" you did to reach enlightment. :lulz:

Hunger/Starvation doesn't exclude someone from God's good pleasure.

[Rust]

If God's pleasure includes starving to death; sure. This doesn't have much to do with your awful understanding of evolution or abiogenesis though.

[-SpectraL]

You need to look up the Good Guy Lucifer memes and realise that in the Bible he is the good character and God is the bad guy who brings death, hatred and destruction.Satan the Devil is what we would call an alien. So are the angels, Jesus and even God Himself. All highly advanced alien individuals who can manipulate matter, time and space at will. Not of this world. They are battling for control of the Earth as we speak. There is a great division between these alien beings... one side wants to bring the destruction of mankind, while the other wants to preserve those who prove themselves righteous. The bad aliens are lead by Satan, who himself is an alien being. He commands legions of bad and corrupted alien beings, their only purpose here on Earth is not to destroy mankind, but rather, have mankind destroy itself. They know their time is running out, so they are all the more frantic and hurried to get as many of us as they can before their time limit runs out.

The good aliens have massive invisible ships at their disposal, with computers on board which can basically use science to accomplish things we would insist are impossible. Their power and intelligence is beyond reckoning. The bad aliens also have and use this same mind-blowing technology as they work toward their goal, and they also have massive and incredibly powerful invisible ships at their disposal. They're all out there right now, as we speak, moving about using extra-dimensional shifting techniques to mask their movements. Everything they can do is pure science. DNA manipulation. Time travel. Instant travel through space. Long-range brain cell activity scans. Manipulation and transformation of matter and non-matter in both time and space. Computerized displays beyond comprehension at their fingertips. Both the good and the bad aliens hold knowledge and capability which puts our best science to shame, and makes our entire volume of knowledge look like mere child's-play. They have machines which can do amazingly wonderful things, such as defeat death itself and banish sickness and suffering forever.

We were put here six thousand years ago after our world was Terra-formed by them. At that time they were all together... all the aliens were one faction under a single government arrangement... both good AND bad. Things changed dramatically after a kind of prime directive was breached by Satan and his many followers and admirers among this alien civilization. Revolt within the government of the aliens broke out... a division was made. The bad ones were thrown into our dimension and onto our planet and deliberately trapped here in this dimension and in this place and time by the good aliens. The bad aliens were given a certain amount of time to prove their false charges and accusations they had leveled in order to defend themselves in the court of law of the good aliens on the count of breaching this prime directive and for their deliberate insubordination. That's why they currently have control of this system of things... as a defense attorney is given time to gather and present evidence. But very shortly now that time limit to prove their claims and accusations will have run out, and they will not have the proof they needed to defend themselves, and they will all be sentenced to death, and all those who followed them will also be sentenced to death by the good aliens.

[TheSexyBeast821]

If God's pleasure includes starving to death; sure. This doesn't have much to do with your awful understanding of evolution or abiogenesis though.

If you gave that kid a shot of heroin he would still feel pleasure despite his starvation.

[Actor]

Evolution kinda seems like an intelligently created algorithm.

[reject]

If you gave that kid a shot of heroin he would still feel pleasure despite his starvation.

So God = heroin?

[Actor]

So God = heroin?

God'd probably be more like weed, lol.

[TheSexyBeast821]

So God = heroin?

God'd probably be more like weed, lol.

Better than both. And free.

[reject]

God'd probably be more like weed, lol.

First TSB said God is the same as crack, now he's switching it upto heroin.

[Rust]

If you gave that kid a shot of heroin he would still feel pleasure despite his starvation.

Yeah, that has nothing to do with what I said. It also has nothing to do with this thread. Whenever you want to stop preaching and start talking about evolution or the education system in the U.S. (i.e. the topics of this thread), let me know,

[Rust]

Evolution kinda seems like an intelligently created algorithm.

Seems like a pretty dumb algorithm if the majority of its creations go extinct.

[ZappaFan]

LOL. This is like, some Onion type bullshit right here. I love it.

I thought the same thing.

[Actor]

Seems like a pretty dumb algorithm if the majority of its creations go extinct.

"On the 10,000th try, there was light"

[Jeff Gatherer]

of course steel beams don't jumble together to make the Eiffel Tower. This disproves Darwinism since towers are living things that grow, consume energy and reproduce with genetic variation

[Jeff Gatherer]

DERP :cool:

[TheSexyBeast821]

of course steel beams don't jumble together to make the Eiffel Tower. This disproves Darwinism since towers are living things that grow, consume energy and reproduce with genetic variation

Yeah, because amino acids are suddenly living things that grow, consume energy, and reproduce with genetic variation. :rolleyes:

[Rust]

Yeah, because amino acids are suddenly living things that grow, consume energy, and reproduce with genetic variation. :rolleyes:

Yeah, because amino-acids are the only thing that came before life. Oh wait, no, you're a moron.

Self-replicating chemicals (such as self-replicating RNA we've discovered (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090109173205.htm) ) can "reproduce" (i.e. self-replicate), consume resources (i.e. elements and compounds that allow self-replication), compete for those resources in chemical space, and can incur chemical variation. The principles of natural selection would still be there, even before life. His point stands, even though he was probably thinking of evolution in general (i.e. the topic of this thread), not abiogenesis, when he made his comment.

[constantinople]

My mom just got super into religion after her divorce and now no longer believes in evolution. which is weird because she's a smart, educated woman.

Lol my Dad did the exact opposite. Got married, found Jesus.

[Greyusurper]

You haven't looked hard enough for proof, because it exists.

TheSexyBeast821 is right, I've been alive since before the days of Noah's flood and I can tell you without a shadow of a watery doubt God and I do exist. We're having a party at TheSexyBeast821's place next weekend too! You're all invited! Their will be cards, beer, and water gun fights! Just be careful to lay off God, he has a heck of a temper when it comes to losing at water gun wars...

:rolleyes:

[jheit8]

well its a private school so its the parents business

Yes but now that the state is dumping funds into them (instead of funds into already failing public schools) they're going to eventually stamp out secular education.
We can only hope the south finally secedes.

[NamelessNom4d]

God fucking damn it, so much retardation in this thread :facepalm:

I'm out :yao:

[DiStOrTiOn]

Yeah, because amino acids are suddenly living things that grow, consume energy, and reproduce with genetic variation. :rolleyes:

tell us how a mechanical metallic structure held together with bolts or gravity is analogous to the atomic forces involved in molecular formation

[TheSexyBeast821]

tell us how a mechanical metallic structure held together with bolts or gravity is analogous to the atomic forces involved in molecular formation

Tornadoes could come sweeping through and assemble the Eiffel Tower given enough time and enough tornadoes.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Tornadoes could come sweeping through and assemble the Eiffel Tower given enough time and enough tornadoes.

how would the steel supports fix together in a way that is analogous to the electrical affinities of molecular formation?

[TheSexyBeast821]

how would the steel supports fix together in a way that is analogous to the electrical affinities of molecular formation?

Nuts and bolts that are also getting swept up by tornadoes.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Nuts and bolts that are also getting swept up by tornadoes.

so bolts inserting into holes and turning radially against a nut is analogous to electrical charges that hold atoms together by mere proximity?

[Yggdrasil]

so bolts inserting into holes and turning radially against a nut is analogous to electrical charges that hold atoms together by mere proximity?

Just stop while you're ahead. Rust, crazyass and a few others have been destroying his arguments in another thread in R&S for over 6 pages and he still hasn't conceded, this'll keep meatspining on and on ad infinitum. Just smile and nod.

[TheSexyBeast821]

so bolts inserting into holes and turning radially against a nut is analogous to electrical charges that hold atoms together by mere proximity?

Spare me the chemistry 101, this is about the creation of life.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Spare me the chemistry 101, this is about the creation of life.

so does this mean they're not analogous? which one is it?


do the nuts and fasteners of the structure float around in a spherical cloud? Does the structure jiggle constantly like molecules do, or does it exist at absolute zero?

[TheSexyBeast821]

so does this mean they're not analogous? which one is it?


do the nuts and fasteners of the structure float around in a spherical cloud? Does the structure jiggle constantly like molecules do, or does it exist at absolute zero?

You don't know how abiogenesis worked so stop pretending you do.

[DiStOrTiOn]

You don't know how abiogenesis worked so stop pretending you do.

according to you, abiogenesis occurred in a way that is analogous to the construction of the eiffel tower


so why don't you elaborate how this construction of steel can be used to understand the atomic forces involved in molecular self assembly?

[Fox News]

Finally a nail in the coffin!

[TheSexyBeast821]

according to you, abiogenesis occurred in a way that is analogous to the construction of the eiffel tower


so why don't you elaborate how this construction of steel can be used to understand the atomic forces involved in molecular self assembly?

My version of abiogenesis entails an intelligence that directed the right molecules to be at the right places at the right times for life to form.

[DiStOrTiOn]

My version of abiogenesis entails an intelligence that directed the right molecules to be at the right places at the right times for life to form.

then your magical creation hypothesis cannot be called abiogenesis



if you wanna claim abiogenesis isn't possible because it would be like steel I-beams assembling into an eiffel tower using wind to insert and swirl the fasteners against counter-rotating nuts, you should first explain to us how the assembly of large and heavy, non-affinitive materials into eiffel tower like structures is analogous to molecular assembly by chaotic motion in fluid mediums and by electrical charges/van der waal forces/binding geometry, then show us your chemical research that concludes without contest that molecules useful or precursory to living molecular systems cannot arise through any geochemical mechanisms and processes (i.e. I can show steel I-beams, threaded fasteners and nuts cannot form in nature under any natural chemical processes, therefore an eiffel tower self-assembling out of them in nature is 100% impossible, amongst many other reasons)

[TheSexyBeast821]

then your magical creation hypothesis cannot be called abiogenesis



if wanna claim abiogenesis isn't possible because it would be like steel I-beams assembling into an eiffel tower using wind to insert and swirl the fasteners against counter-rotating nuts, you should first explain to us how the assembly of large and heavy, non-affinitive materials into macro structures is analogous to supramolecular assembly by random kinetic movements in 3D space and electrical charges/van der waal forces/binding geometry, then show us your chemical research that concludes without contest that molecules useful or precursory to living molecular systems cannot arise through any geochemical mechanisms and processes (i.e. I can show steel I-beams, threaded fasteners and nuts cannot form in nature under any natural chemical processes, therefore an eiffel tower self-assembling out of them in nature is 100% impossible, amongst many other reasons)

Well I am alive, and God is here, so the most logical conclusion is that He had a hand in making life, even if it appears to be nothing but probability.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Well I am alive, and God is here, so the most logical conclusion is that He had a hand in making life, even if it appears to be nothing but probability.



the most logical conclusion of chemical assemblage is supernatural entities rather than chemical mechanisms?


how did you arrive to that conclusion?

[TheSexyBeast821]

the most logical conclusion of chemical assemblage is supernatural entities rather than chemical mechanisms?


how did you arrive to that conclusion?

The supernatural element violated the improbability of the chemical assemblage happening on it's own.

[Captain Falcon]

Why are you still arguing with this idiot?

[DiStOrTiOn]

The supernatural element violated the improbability of the chemical assemblage happening on it's own.

and god-entities violate naturality, so what do you choose?


supernaturality and infinite amounts of gods as the origin of functionally-alive molecular systems, or natural chemical processes?

[bobapanbeers]

god must be pretty evil if he's letting the devil hurt people...

[Greyusurper]

Well I am alive, and God is here, so the most logical conclusion is that He had a hand in making life, even if it appears to be nothing but probability.

The supernatural element violated the improbability of the chemical assemblage happening on it's own.

You keep using words like 'probablility' and 'improbability', but I do not think you know what they mean.

[TheSexyBeast821]

You keep using words like 'probablility' and 'improbability', but I do not think you know what they mean.

I don't think you know what the word 'God' means.

[Rust]

He didn't use the word God. Pay attention, troll.

[TheSexyBeast821]

He didn't use the word God. Pay attention, troll.

I know the exorbitant amount of variables present that would have to come together perfectly for abiogensis is extremely improbable, bordering on impossible, without something to guide it along.

[Haiti's Space Agency]

I know the exorbitant amount of variables present that would have to come together perfectly for abiogensis is extremely improbable, bordering on impossible, without something to guide it along.

nothing is impossible.

[Rust]

I know the exorbitant amount of variables present that would have to come together perfectly for abiogensis is extremely improbable, bordering on impossible, without something to guide it along.

No, you don't know that. It's quite clear from this thread that you don't even understand the principles behind abiogenesis, much less have ability to determine what's improbable or not about it. You're a moron.

[reject]

Rust, don't you find yourself getting dumber the longer you reply and converse to him?

[TheSexyBeast821]

No, you don't know that. It's quite clear from this thread that you don't even understand the principles behind abiogenesis, much less have ability to determine what's improbable or not about it. You're a moron.

And I think you're a moron for not being able to grasp the concept of God by simply thinking outside of your materialist rationalism world-view, which is incorrect.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Rust, don't you find yourself getting dumber the longer you reply and converse to him?

My IQ is higher than yours according to a trained psychologist who administered a test to me in person.

[reject]

:lol:

[TheSexyBeast821]

:lol:

Go ahead and think I'm making that up. Facts are facts, and your disbelief doesn't change that fact.

[reject]

Derp.

Indeed.

[Greyusurper]

My IQ is higher than yours according to a trained psychologist who administered a test to me in prison.

Fix't.

[reject]

Fix't.

It was probably a priest who told him that whilst ass fucking him.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Fix't.

It was probably a priest who told him that whilst ass fucking him.

Clearly when the facts get in the way of your own personal beliefs, you choose your beliefs over facts.

[reject]

:lol:

[bobapanbeers]

Clearly when the facts get in the way of your own personal beliefs, you choose your beliefs over facts.

of course because the truth hurts, and thinking you live in a fantasy world is easier

[Rust]

And I think you're a moron for not being able to grasp the concept of God by simply thinking outside of your materialist rationalism world-view, which is incorrect.

:lol:

[sexually vulnerable CPR dummy]

This is so stupid, what if the lochness monster was real and it was our missing evolutionary link.

[bobapanbeers]

the guy who took the most famous photography of Nessie confessed on his death bed that it was fake.

I heard that vikings hunted and ate the Loch Ness Monster long ago

[Ph0x]

http://i52.tinypic.com/14juetu.jpg

[Township Rebellion]

Hey TheSexyBeast821; can I ask you when you found your faith? What happened that pushed you to it? Did you just come to it after years of emotional struggle, did somebody convince you personally, or what? I want you to be honest here. What did you believe before you found your faith? I ask this as a man who went through a similar change years ago now, even if it was in the opposite direction.

I'll be 100% honest, I'm not interested in arguing with you or using your responses against you. I'm just curious.

[Captain Falcon]

Hey TheSexyBeast821; can I ask you when you found your faith? What happened that pushed you to it? Did you just come to it after years of emotional struggle, did somebody convince you personally, or what? I want you to be honest here. What did you believe before you found your faith? I ask this as a man who went through a similar change years ago now, even if it was in the opposite direction.

I'll be 100% honest, I'm not interested in arguing with you or using your responses against you. I'm just curious.

Curious to find out what sparked his blind dogma?

[DiStOrTiOn]

I know the exorbitant amount of variables present that would have to come together perfectly for abiogensis is extremely improbable, bordering on impossible, without something to guide it along.

which model has the exorbitant amount of variables present that would make abiogenesis extremely improbable?

is it the hydrothermal hypothesis, Zn-world hypothesis, iron-sulfur world hypothesis, radioactive isotope assisted hypothesis, the UV and heat-assisted replication hypothesis, RNA (or other nucleic acid polymer) world hypothesis, thermosynthesis/chemiosmosis world hypothesis, probiont hypothesis, autocatalysis or clay catalysis or pumice raft catalyst hypothesis, lipid world hypothesis, polyphosphate world hypothesis, PAH world hypothesis, or the primordial soup hypothesis?


can you show me your chemical research proving conclusively that none of these geochemical mechanisms can form the molecules the hypothesis claims they do, or that none of the products could suit the development of living systems within a 100 million year margin of time?

then can you show me your in-depth scientific analysis of every possible organic chemical reaction that could ever occur on primordial earth that proves none could ever lead to functional and heritable molecular systems?

[Township Rebellion]

Curious to find out what sparked his blind dogma?

That's about the long and the short of it.

[reject]

That's about the long and the short of it.

He doesn't genuinely believe in God.

[Captain Falcon]

He doesn't genuinely believe in God.

I was thinking that. Nobody can genuinely be so stupid.

[reject]

It's so obvious when he says shit like this:

Clearly when the facts get in the way of your own personal beliefs, you choose your beliefs over facts.

If I was trolling that I believed in God that's exactly what I'd say.

[Captain Falcon]

It's so obvious when he says shit like this:



If I was trolling that I believed in God that's exactly what I'd say.

http://i.imgur.com/O2pBe.gif

[DiStOrTiOn]

It's so obvious when he says shit like this:



If I was trolling that I believed in God that's exactly what I'd say.

I know religious people who genuinely say things like "well, the evidence of my religion was just overwhelmingly true so I couldn't do anything but believe it"

most followers of any religion probably believe facts led them to their religion rather than emotions

[reject]

But there are no facts.

In 2000 years are people going to take Harry Potter as seriously as people take the Bible?

It's got good and evil, it's got magic, it's got a chosen one. It's got all the hallmarks for batshit people in the future to make it into a religion and believe all that shit happened.

[reject]

They'll probably dig out the films and claim them as documented evidence that Harry existed and did all this shit.

[Ph0x]

I always thought Dune would make a good bible.

[TheSexyBeast821]

It's a fact that I live as part of the Mystical Body of Christ, or in communion with God. My conversion entailed a lot more phenomenon that current science would explain as 'faulty equipment' because of the current hypotheses about neuroscience and consciousness. If I shouldn't trust myself and my own experiences, then why the hell should I trust someone else's judgement of a situation when they didn't even experience it?

[Junior Jacon Jeese Jurger]

http://i48.tinypic.com/v49s2g.jpg

[reject]

About tree fiddy.

[TheSexyBeast821]

About tree fiddy.

Just so you know, I'm not a troll. It is a bit ironic though how you fell back on religious fundamental logic when my IQ was brought up. You beliefs about my IQ not being high (or higher than yours) was in contradiction with the fact that it indeed is very high (likely higher than yours), and you went with your own constructed beliefs thinking that my IQ must be low. That's fundamentalism at its finest.

[Rust]

When your IQ was brought up? You brought it up. He also didn't say your IQ couldn't be high. He laughed. Probably at your insecurity since you needed to bring up IQ as soon as someone called you out on the fact that you're incredibly uninformed on evolution and abiogenesis.

[TheSexyBeast821]

When your IQ was brought up? You brought it up. He also didn't say your IQ couldn't be high. He laughed. Probably at your insecurity since you needed to bring up IQ as soon as someone called you out on the fact that you're incredibly uninformed on evolution and abiogenesis.

I brought it up in response to him essentially saying my posts emanate a lack of intelligence.

[reject]

When your IQ was brought up? You brought it up. He also didn't say your IQ couldn't be high. He laughed.

It was one of the rare moments when it did actually make me laugh out loud.

[Rust]

I brought it up in response to him essentially saying my posts emanate a lack of intelligence.

He said someone would get dumber by reading your posts. That's pretty damn accurate seeing as you don't know what the fuck you're talking about half the time.

Your science literacy is atrocious.

[TheSexyBeast821]

So my intelligence isn't in question anymore? Just my knowledge of abiogenesis?

[reject]

How can your intelligence be in question when you don't have any :confused:

[Rust]

So my intelligence isn't in question anymore? Just my knowledge of abiogenesis?

Well, if you feel that having a high IQ according to a test makes you intelligent... :lol:

[TheSexyBeast821]

How can your intelligence be in question when you don't have any :confused:

Well, if you feel that having a high IQ according to a test makes you intelligent... :lol:

IQ tests are the scientific measure of intelligence. There you guys go arguing a fact with your belief that there is no way I could be intelligent (possibly more-so than either of you).

[reject]

So you believe science when it says you're "intelligent", but you don't believe it when it proves all your beliefs wrong?

[TheSexyBeast821]

So you believe science when it says you're "intelligent", but you don't believe it when it proves all your beliefs wrong?

Science hasn't even come close to proving any of my beliefs wrong.

[reject]

Science hasn't even come close to proving any of my beliefs wrong.

In which case it hasn't even come close to proving your intelligence.

If you're not a troll then I feel very sorry for you.

It's one thing to hold beliefs in God, one of my best friends is a pretty die hard Christian, but he's not so insecure he has to preach or tells me I'm wrong in believing in science or that I should convert. I think you're not at all comfortable in what you believe, which is why you try so hard to preach and convince us that God is real.

[Rust]

IQ tests are the scientific measure of intelligence. There you guys go arguing a fact with your belief that there is no way I could be intelligent (possibly more-so than either of you).

Scoring highly in an IQ test is not proof that you're intelligent. You can add this to the long list of things you know next to nothing about. IQ tests test for certain skills and abilities. Whether those demonstrate intelligence by themselves, whether they are just one aspect of intelligence or whether they demonstrate intelligence at all, is a hotly debated issue within the scientific community.

I also didn't say you couldn't be intelligent or even more intelligent than me. There you go again, not understanding science and misrepresenting facts.

[ShutMeUp]

goddammit I cant thank any more of Rust's posts bc I've already used all my thanks on him :angry:


I'd just like to say, after reading this thread fully: poor kids, schools should not be allowed to jumble science and teach kids misinformation just because it suits. it's simply not all right.

also :lulz: at thesexybeastnumbers, who is somehow still finding straws to grab at

edit: appropriate picture

http://donaldsmithgraphics.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/karl-pilkington.png?w=426&h=497

[TheSexyBeast821]

In which case it hasn't even come close to proving your intelligence.

If you're not a troll then I feel very sorry for you.

It's one thing to hold beliefs in God, one of my best friends is a pretty die hard Christian, but he's not so insecure he has to preach or tells me I'm wrong in believing in science or that I should convert. I think you're not at all comfortable in what you believe, which is why you try so hard to preach and convince us that God is real.

I believe in science, I also believe in God. The only reason I try to get you to believe in God is to get you in on some of the action you're missing out on.

Scoring highly in an IQ test is not proof that you're intelligent. You can add this to the long list of things you know next to nothing about. IQ tests test for certain skills and abilities. Whether those demonstrate intelligence by themselves, whether they are just one aspect of intelligence or whether they demonstrate intelligence at all, is a hotly debated issue within the scientific community.

I also didn't say you couldn't be intelligent or even more intelligent than me. There you go again, not understanding science and misrepresenting facts.

You routinely call me a moron and other such names, which is you claiming superior intelligence to me. IQ tests are the best scientific measure of intelligence we have, and if we are going to use science, then I think you should stop insulting my intelligence unless you enjoy also insulting your own intelligence.

[Rust]

You routinely call me a moron and other such names, which is you claiming superior intelligence to me. IQ tests are the best scientific measure of intelligence we have, and if we are going to use science, then I think you should stop insulting my intelligence unless you enjoy also insulting your own intelligence.

No, I don't claim superior intelligence. I claim you're a moron. Whether I'm a moron too or not is another issue. (For someone with a high IQ you sure as fuck don't understand logic; claiming you're X doesn't mean I couldn't be X as well). I'll continue calling you a moron so long as you continue to do moronic things like claiming abiogenesis is improbable when you don't even understand the type of chemical structures that would be relevant, haven't done any analysis, and don't understand statistics to begin with.

And again, the fact that you supposedly scored high in an IQ test is irrelevant. So what? You're not the only one, and more importantly that doesn't change anything in this thread. Your knowledge about evolution and abiogenesis is atrocious. That's the point. If you have a high IQ, it's clearly not helping.


P.S. You "believe in science" whenever it conveniences you and doesn't refute your silly superstitions, which is as meaningful as a rapist saying he believes in the law except for the parts that say rape is illegal.

[TheSexyBeast821]

No, I don't claim superior intelligence. I claim you're a moron. Whether I'm a moron too or not is another issue. (For someone with a high IQ you sure as fuck don't understand logic; claiming you're X doesn't mean I couldn't be X as well). I'll continue calling you a moron so long as you continue to do moronic things like claiming abiogenesis is improbable when you don't even understand the type of chemical structures that would be relevant, haven't done any analysis, and don't understand statistics to begin with.

And again, the fact that you supposedly scored high in an IQ test is irrelevant. So what? You're not the only one, and more importantly that doesn't change anything in this thread. Your knowledge about evolution and abiogenesis is atrocious. That's the point. If you have a high IQ, it's clearly not helping.


P.S. You "believe in science" whenever it conveniences you and doesn't refute your silly superstitions, which is as meaningful as a rapist saying he believes in the law except for the parts that say rape is illegal.

From now on say "You aren't educated enough on the topic at hand to provide a valid opinion" instead of insulting my intelligence, which is indirectly insulting your own intelligence.

And by the way, my knowledge of abiogenesis is not atrocious, and me saying it is highly improbable for all the constituents of a cell to be formed at the same exact time and the same exact place to actually form the cell is a true statement.

[Rust]

From now on say "You aren't educated enough on the topic at hand to provide a valid opinion" instead of insulting my intelligence, which is indirectly insulting your own intelligence.

Why? You're a fucking moron. If you continue doing moronic things I'll continue calling you a moron. It's rather simple, and doesn't involve me insulting anyone else's intelligence other than yours.

Someone who isn't educated enough on a topic would simply not speak about it; or would ask questions. You don't do that. You act like if you know what you're talking about, and misrepresent the facts and the science to suit your superstitions. You're a moron.


And by the way, my knowledge of abiogenesis is not atrocious, and me saying it is highly improbable for all the constituents of a cell to be formed at the same exact time and the same exact place to actually form the cell is a true statement.

Yes it is. You've gotten basic facts about abiogenesis completely wrong in this thread. It's atrocious. In fact, you made my point for me in that very sentence:

Why in the world would "all the constituents of a cell" have to be formed "at the same exact time and the same exact place"? No reason. The primitive life-forms that are relevant in this discussion are not cells; nor would its components have to be formed at the exact same time and the exact same place.

[-SpectraL]

From now on say "You aren't educated enough on the topic at hand to provide a valid opinion" instead of insulting my intelligence, which is indirectly insulting your own intelligence.

And by the way, my knowledge of abiogenesis is not atrocious, and me saying it is highly improbable for all the constituents of a cell to be formed at the same exact time and the same exact place to actually form the cell is a true statement.You're dealing with someone who consistently employs selective reading and selective comprehension, depending on what pile of bullshit he's currently pushing. You'd have better luck with a politician or a lawyer.

[reject]

You're dealing with someone who consistently employs selective reading and selective comprehension, depending on what pile of bullshit he's currently pushing. You'd have better luck with a politician or a lawyer.

You quoted the wrong person.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Why? You're a fucking moron. If you continue doing moronic things I'll continue calling you a moron. It's rather simple, and doesn't involve me insulting anyone else's intelligence other than yours.



Yes it is. You've gotten basic facts about abiogenesis completely wrong in this thread. It's atrocious. In fact, you made my point for me in that very sentence:

Why in the world would "all the constituents of a cell" have to be formed "at the same exact time and the same exact place"? No reason. The primitive life-forms we're talking about are not cells; nor would they have to be formed at the exact same time and the exact same place.

One nucleotide A is formed at time x. Nucleotide B, that could bond with nucleotide A to start forming self-replicating RNA forms at time x+100 years. Too bad for nucleotide B, because nucleotide A isn't an immortal molecule and has degraded into it's constituents, thus they couldn't start forming RNA, much less self-replicating RNA. Oh, and nucleotide B was formed on the opposite side of the Earth. Whoops.

[ShutMeUp]

You quoted the wrong person.

lol here's a pretend thanks, I'm all out.



SpectraL you cannot be serious after that huge troll post you responded with

[Rust]

One nucleotide A is formed at time x. Nucleotide B, that could bond with nucleotide A to start forming self-replicating RNA forms at time x+100 years. Too bad for nucleotide B, because nucleotide A isn't an immortal molecule and has degraded into it's constituents, thus they couldn't start forming RNA, much less self-replicating RNA. Oh, and nucleotide B was formed on the opposite side of the Earth. Whoops.

So did you have anything intelligent to add to this or not? Because you basically made my point for me: Unless you're suggesting that the only two options are "at the exact same time" or "100 years later", then it's clear that they do not have to form at the exact same time or the exact same location.

It's also clear that the primitive life-forms we're talking about are not cells like you were saying.

[TheSexyBeast821]

So did you have anything intelligent to add to this or not? Because you basically made my point for me: Unless you're suggesting that the only two options are "at the exact same time" or "100 years later", then it's clear that they do not have to form at the exact same time or the exact same location.

It's also clear that the primitive life-forms we're talking about are not cells like you were saying.

You missed the point of my post entirely. If they don't form at roughly the same time and at the same location they can never combine to make a more complex molecule. I was even being generous by giving them only a hundred year gap in formation, which is minuscule in the frame of time which abiogenesis supposedly happened.

[reject]

No.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Texas Republicans also want to stop teaching critical thinking in schools, because it "undermines the child's parents' values". Ha.

[Rust]

You missed the point of my post entirely. If they don't form at roughly the same time and at the same location they can never combine to make a more complex molecule. I was even being generous by giving them only a hundred year gap in formation, which is minuscule in the frame of time which abiogenesis supposedly happened.

No, you missed my point. You said they had to form in the exact time and location. I'm pointing out the fact that we're not limited to the ridiculous alternatives you gave, and that the chemical components could form hours, days or even weeks later/before, and or be millimeters, centimeters, or even meters way.

Not the exact location. Not the exact time. My point exactly.


----

In other words, whether because of ignorance or dishonesty, you decided to use "exact time and place" to exaggerate your shitty point look stronger, when the reality is it doesn't have to be an exact place or exact time. Now you're backtracking to say "roughly the same place" or "roughly the same time", which is a nice way of saying "not the exact place and not the exact time".

[TheSexyBeast821]

No, you missed my point. You said they had to form in the exact time and location. I'm pointing out the fact that we're not limited to the ridiculous alternatives you gave, and that the chemical components could form hours, days or even weeks later/before, and or be millimeters, centimeters, or even meters way.

Not the exact location. Not the exact time. My point exactly.

In the scheme of the time-frame of abiogenesis, and the size of the Earth compared to a molecule, your parameters for the chemical components forming a more complex molecule are highly, highly improbable. Thanks for proving my point.

[Rust]

In the scheme of the time-frame of abiogenesis, and the size of the Earth compared to a molecule, your parameters for the chemical components forming a more complex molecule are highly, highly improbable. Thanks for proving my point.

As if we needed any more evidence that you're a complete fucking moron, you go and claim I proved your point when in fact I refuted it. Pay attention. You claimed they needed to form in the exact same time and the exact same location:

"all the constituents of a cell [needed to be] formed at the same exact time and the same exact place"

That is wrong. And that you think the size of Earth and the timeline of abiogenesis helps your cases show how little you know about what you're talking about. A large Earth and a long time-line helps my case.

[-SpectraL]

"You see, to outline a successful argument for or against you have to have the other guy make your point for you, or at least fully believe he has done so. It's really no good if you make your own points."

~ Rust

[TheSexyBeast821]

As if we needed any more evidence that you're a complete fucking moron, you go and claim I proved your point when in fact I refuted it.

You claimed they needed to form in the exact same time and the exact same location:

"all the constituents of a cell [needed to be] formed at the same exact time and the same exact place"

Wrong.

Considering the scale of the time-frame for abiogenesis, two constituents forming a few weeks apart and combining to form something more complex is essentially the same thing as them forming at the same time and same place. You are nitpicking, you know it, and you know just how improbable your theory is.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Rust stop derailing fucking threads just because the guy above me posts.

[Rust]

Considering the scale of the time-frame for abiogenesis, two constituents forming a few weeks apart and combining to form something more complex is essentially the same thing as them forming at the same time and same place. You are nitpicking, you know it, and you know just how improbable your theory is.

No, it's not you moron. We're talking about the physical distance they would have to be from one another. That's irrespective of the size of the Earth. The size of the Earth could be 100 times smaller, and the window we're talking about would the same, and the chemical interactions within that window would have the same probability.

[TheSexyBeast821]

No, it's not you moron. We're talking about the physical distance they would have to be from one another. That's irrespective of the size of the Earth. The size of the Earth could be 100 times smaller, and the window we're talking about would the same, and the chemical interactions within that window would have the same probability.

What if the conditions to form nucleotide A were on one side of the Earth and the conditions for nucleotide B were on the other side of the Earth? What you are suggesting (all requisite chemical constituents forming within a month of each other in an area of a few square meters) in the scheme of time as large as that of abiogenesis, and an area the size of the Earth's surface is highly, highly improbable.

[Rust]

What if the conditions to form nucleotide A were on one side of the Earth and the conditions for nucleotide B were on the other side of the Earth?

What of it? Then those two "nucleotides" would be formed too far away from each other. So? I didn't claim that all of such molecules on Earth would magically coincide. I said the relevant molecules didn't have to form at the exact same location or the exact same time. You conceded as much already. You're trying to pass if off as "nit-picking" when in fact that's an incredibly important point. The space of possibilities is many orders of magnitudes higher just by the trillions of new attempts that could occur when you go from a window of t=0 (i.e. exact time) to a window of t=+-months.


What you are suggesting (all requisite chemical constituents forming within a month of each other in an area of a few square meters) in the scheme of time as large as that of abiogenesis, and an area the size of the Earth's surface is highly, highly improbable.

No, that's not what I'm suggesting. That's what YOU are suggesting. You're the one who brought up this incredibly simplistic view of abiogenesis. I just pointed out how your incredibly simplistic view was horseshit just by the mere fact that you claimed it had to be the exact same location and exact same place, when that wasn't true at all.

I don't understand why you keep mentioning the time and size of Earth. Neither of these help you. The more time, the more chances for the interaction to take place. The size of earth is irrelevant in that the chemical interactions would be occurring all over Earth as well; we're essentially asking about an average X m^2 region. That's a constant regardless of the size of Earth.

[TheSexyBeast821]

What of it? Then those two "nucleotides" would be formed too far away from each other. So? I didn't claim that they would magically all coincide. I said they didn't have to form at the exact same location or the exact same time. You conceded as much already. You're trying to pass if off as "nit-picking" when in fact that's an incredibly important point. The space of possibilities is many orders of magnitudes higher just by the trillions of new attempts that could occur when you go from a window of t=0 (i.e. exact time) to a window of t=+-months.



No, that's not what I'm suggesting. That's what YOU are suggesting. You're the one who brought up this incredibly simplistic view of abiogenesis. I just pointed out how your incredibly simplistic view was horseshit just by the mere fact that you claimed it had to be the exact same location and exact same place, when that wasn't true at all.

I don't understand why you keep mentioning the time and size of Earth. Neither of these help you. The more time, the more chances for the interaction to take place. The size of earth is irrelevant in that the chemical interactions would be occurring all over Earth as well.

The larger the time-frame, the less likely it is for chemical constituents to be around at the same time. Nucleotide A could be around for a million years and never meet nucleotide B because nucleotide B needed different conditions than nucleotide A and they were separated by millions of years.

[Rust]

The larger the time-frame, the less likely it is for chemical constituents to be around at the same time. Nucleotide A could be around for a million years and never meet nucleotide B because nucleotide B needed different conditions than nucleotide A and they were separated by millions of years.

By your incredibly retarded logic, human sexual reproduction wouldn't be possible. It suffers from the same exact "flaw": The larger the time-frame of human life on Earth, the less likely it is for two humans to be around at the same time and fuck. Person A could be around for thousands of years and never meet Person B. :rolleyes:

No, if they "combined" (I'm using ultra simplistic terms for sake of making this readable), then by definition the conditions did not preclude both components and both existed in the same time (Note: not the same thing as being created at the same time).

The issue is a matter of trials: Are there enough trials for these components to be created, and come in contact with each other? The higher the age of the universe, the higher number of trials.

[ShutMeUp]

okay I'm subscribing now. it's becoming harsh and shameful, like watching someone beating a puppy

[TheSexyBeast821]

By your incredibly retarded logic, human sexual reproduction wouldn't be possible. It suffers from the same exact "flaw": The larger the time-frame of human life on Earth, the less likely it is for two humans to be around at the same time and fuck. Person A and Person B could be separated by thousands of years. :rolleyes:

No, if they "combined" (I'm using ultra simplistic terms for sake of making this readable), then by definition the conditions did not preclude both components and both existed in the same time (Note: not the same thing as being created at the same time).

The issue is a matter of trials: Are there enough trials for these components to be created, and come in contact with each other? The higher the age of the universe, the higher number of trials.

And I view it as a miracle that all requisite components for life existed at the same place and at the same time.

[Rust]

And I view it as a miracle that all requisite components for life existed at the same place and at the same time.

No shit Sherlock, we all know that. The issue is not what you believe; we are all quite aware that you believe in your superstitions. The issue is whether you have anything other than your incredibly dumb opinion to back up that belief. You don't. You have repeatedly stated that it is impossible or highly improbable, and every single time you've embarrassed yourself when asked to explain why.

[TheSexyBeast821]

No shit Sherlock, we all know that. The issue is not what you believe; we are all quite aware that you believe in your superstitions. The issue is whether you have anything other than your incredibly dumb opinion to back up that belief. You don't. You have repeatedly stated that it is impossible or highly improbable, and every single time you've embarrassed yourself when asked to explain why.

I have reality on my side, Rust.

[Rust]

:lol:

[TheSexyBeast821]

:lol:

Your mind always perceives reality through the filters of your thought system. This clouds your vision of objective reality because you are filtering it.

[Rust]

Yeah, we get it. Whenever you can't respond to someone's points you ignore them and make some wishy-washy statement in the hopes of changing the subject.

If you have nothing to say about the subject of evolution, abiogenesis, or education, then there's nothing else to discuss. Bye.

[-SpectraL]

And then there's the fact that it's physically impossible to get something from nothing. So you have a molecule... that molecule has to come from somewhere. A molecule doesn't just spring into existence of its own accord. And if you break the molecule down into its derivative components, you are still left with something. You never break it down enough that you are left with nothing at all... you are always left with something. It would be like saying you could take a pound of butter, cut it in half, then take one of those halves and cut that into halves, the pieces getting smaller and smaller as they are cut in half, until eventually... millions of years down the road cutting the halves into halves, you're eventually going to cut the half in half and there will be nothing at all there. Just ain't gonna happen. Matter itself cannot just spring into existence any more than it can disappear upon dissection. And yet evolution nut-balls will claim again and again that matter itself.... the most basic particles of matter and energy... somehow sprang into existence from... well, they don't have an answer to that... or on the other hand, they'll insist those elementary particles were just always there. But if they were "always there", where/what is "there"? They don't have an answer to that question either.

[p6867]

no spectral, you just don't have any kind of understanding of science. You're response of 'shit we don't absolutely understand yet disproves evolution or physics' is fucking stupid and people have been using it for generations. It's just the god of the gaps argument which is fucking retarded, limited and sad. The more we learn, the old gaps in your argument are abandoned, forcing you to retreat from, 'if we came from monkeys, why are there monkeys,' to 'how is RNA formed' to 'where do electrons come from?'

As science answers these questions you can't use them for your stupid argument anymore, but eventually, we'll find out and so far, the answer to these questions hasn't come up, because jesus said so.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Yeah, we get it. Whenever you can't respond to someone's points you ignore them and make some wishy-washy statement in the hopes of changing the subject.

If you have nothing to say about the subject of evolution, abiogenesis, or education, then there's nothing else to discuss. Bye.

The Divine had a hand in the creation of life and evolution, as evidenced by the Divine's existence in the present moment.

[reject]

The Divine had a hand in the creation of life and evolution, as evidenced by the Divine's existence in the present moment.

Tomorrow when they announce the Higgs Boson your God will finally have been proven.

[bobapanbeers]

Thank you rust and sexybeast821 I learned a lot while reading this thread. I must also thank the most gracious Allah, it is his will if we live another day. Praise Allah

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Thank you rust and sexybeast821 I learned a lot while reading this thread.

All I learned is that they're on a homoerotic two man mission to derail any and every potentially interesting thread on this site with their back-and-forth bullshit.

[TheSexyBeast821]

All I learned is that they're on a homoerotic two man mission to derail any and every potentially interesting thread on this site with their back-and-forth bullshit.

All I've ever learned from you is where to not put highlighters. Or anything for that matter.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

All I've ever learned from you is where to not put highlighters. Or anything for that matter.

Then you've learned more from me than either of you has or will ever have managed to teach the other. All I'm saying is try to keep your massive 5 page arguments confined to The Inhumane Condition or something.

[jheit8]

Thank you rust and sexybeast821 I learned a lot while reading this thread. I must also thank the most gracious Allah, it is his will if we live another day. Praise Allah

Ayyuha l-muslim mujahid - Nasheed - *UmmahAnasheed* - YouTube

[TheSexyBeast821]

Then you've learned more from me than either of you has or will ever have managed to teach the other. All I'm saying is try to keep your massive 5 page arguments confined to The Inhumane Condition or something.

One day Rust is going to almost lose his mind but then he'll remember everything I've said to him and he'll remain sane.

[DiStOrTiOn]

And I view it as a miracle that all requisite components for life existed at the same place and at the same time.


what are those requisite components needed for making functional and heritable molecule systems? Are they unstable? Can you show me your scientific research that proves the geochemical mechanisms had to produce all these components at the same location and at exactly the same time or else life would otherwise not develop from them?

[bobapanbeers]

Then you've learned more from me than either of you has or will ever have managed to teach the other. All I'm saying is try to keep your massive 5 page arguments confined to The Inhumane Condition or something.

Wait a minute we still have to sort out a bunch of things; what about the big bang or the impending big crunch, the nature of time and that is didn't exist for a moment (if we can call it that), why are there different religions which all declare that they hold the ''Truth'', time travel, that mole on my back, why is my car always breaking down, the much too rapid evolution of man in geological terms, boobies, Marisa Tomei winning an oscar, ancient aliens, which god is stronger, other alternative dimensions, etc.

Theses are all topics that we can and must argue about that have something to do with fairytales being taught in school. Do you think the chinesse are teaching their children fairytales? no, and they outnumber us by a billion. The red dragon is awaking!!!! be afraid!

[Greyusurper]

The Divine had a hand in the creation of life and evolution, as evidenced by the Divine's existence in the present moment.

Which god was that again? Thor? Zeus? Allah? Please, do tell "all knowing about the beginning of the creation of life" man. :whistle:

[TheSexyBeast821]

Which god was that again? Thor? Zeus? Allah? Please, do tell all knowing about the beginning of the creation of life, man. :whistle:

The One True God has many names, of the ones you mentioned Allah is one of the names.

[Captain Falcon]

Rust just corroded your ass.

[Rust]

Stop feeding him. All he wants is the last word. He's not going to respond to your points, he's going to reply with some banal bullshit about his awful god until you stop responding.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Rust just corroded your ass.

Stop feeding him. All he wants is the last word. He's not going to respond to your points, he's going to reply with some banal bullshit about his awful god until you stop responding.

One day Rust is going to almost lose his mind but then he'll remember everything I've said to him and he'll remain sane.

You're welcome.

[Captain Falcon]

All he wants is the last word

I'm not giving it to him :lol:

[Haiti's Space Agency]

amerifat children are going to be thinking the lock ness monster is real

[TheSexyBeast821]

It's funny how atheists think they have the power to compete with God. Someone Who gives me unparalleled joy and pleasure, or people who deem themselves supremely rational and the pinnacle of human knowledge but have a gaping void within themselves.

[DiStOrTiOn]

It's funny how atheists think they have the power to compete with Harry Potter. Someone Who gives me unparalleled joy and pleasure, or people who deem themselves supremely rational and the pinnacle of human knowledge but have a gaping void within themselves.

fixed

[TheSexyBeast821]

fixed

I forgot to mention the communion and fellowship that comes with Christ.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

I forgot to mention the communion and fellowship that comes with Harry Potter fandom.

Fixed.

[Captain Falcon]

I forgot to mention the communion and fellowship that comes with Star Trek: TNG

Fixt

[reject]

Harry Potter is a better Jesus character than, well, Jesus.

[DiStOrTiOn]

Harry Potter is a better Jesus character than, well, Jesus.

Jesus only knows how to cast spells that turn water into wine and make zombies out of dead people.

Harry Potter can like, fly on broomsticks and make shit levitate. That is way better IMO

[Captain Falcon]

Also, Harry died for everybody and came back anyway because he was more badass than Jesus.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Too bad Harry Potter can't satisfactorily fill the void in your life, especially not with the quality of God's good pleasure.

[reject]

Too bad Harry Potter can't satisfactorily fill the void in your life, especially not with the quality of God's good pleasure.

Wishful but misguided thinking.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Wishful but misguided thinking.

Harry Potter also doesn't offer metaphysical communion and fellowship. Harry Potter fandom is quite simply not comparable to belief in God.

[reject]

No, it very much is comparable to the belief in god.

[TheSexyBeast821]

No, it very much is comparable to the belief in god.

One is fiction, one is Reality.

[-SpectraL]

The logic of an evolutionist is akin to a man standing in the Library of Congress and staring up in wonder at the various levels containing millions of books - all sorted according to author, subject and date, and thinking to himself, "I'll bet you this whole place was just a random accident. Somehow these books wrote themselves, then managed to get themselves up on those shelves, and then they sorted themselves once they were up there. Wood particles in the air, over billions of years, mind you, eventually came together to form the paper. Then microbes from the air kept landing on the paper, and eventually, after billions of years, those microbes wrote all the books by trial and error. After the microbes wrote every single book in the entire library, all those billions of pages were subjected to a billion earthquakes, which eventually put all the pages of every book in order and separated all the ordered pages into their respective volumes. After that, the rays from the Sun, after billions of years mind you, fried the edges of the sorted volumes the earthquakes had left, gluing them together into books. The microbes then came back again, over time mind you, and settled down on the arranged book volumes, leaving behind completely random titles on the covers that actually ended up to be the right ones completely by accident (the covers themselves were brought into the library by freak tornadoes over billions of years). Next, the wind pushed all the books into alphabetical order and ingeniously sorted them correctly according to author, title and subject (after billions of years of the wind pushing the books around this way and that, mind you) until they all ended up there on the shelves due to the unpredictable and active nature of teh wind. That's how all those books got up there... by the simply and obvious process of evolution of the library over billions of years."

^ This is what God sees when He sees just how ignorant, clueless, illogical and senseless people are when faced with the complex and intelligent designs of His creation. He sees people who just can't accept reality and common sense because they have their own agendas, and they mean to keep themselves willfully disillusioned regardless of the consequences. It's a very sad state which the bulk of humanity is in right now. Close-minded, illogical, senseless and just plain stupid. It's a wonder to me that He even cares about these shameful wastes of oxygen.

[BungHole]

Because the trees could become a house they eventually had to become a house..

This is actually the explanation for all of existence. Probability and a whole lot of empty space to fill.

[-SpectraL]

This is actually the explanation for all of existence. Probability and a whole lot of empty space to fill.The problem is, even given eternity, the forest will never become a finished house.

[Yggdrasil]

The problem is, even given eternity, the forest will never become a finished house.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/002/395/magnets_c.jpg

[reject]

One is fiction, one is Reality.

Huh, admitting the Bible is fiction. Your faith is eroding before our eyes.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Huh, admitting the Bible is fiction. Your faith is eroding before our eyes.

Like I said before, you atheists have no chance of competing with God. One gives me an abundance of love and joy, while the others preach an endless internal void that can never be filled disguised as rationality.

[Aperson444]

Like I said before, you atheists have no chance of competing with God. One gives me an abundance of love and joy, while the others preach an endless internal void that can never be filled disguised as rationality.

It's a pity. I've never seen a more obvious trolling attempt.

If God exists, God does not care about humanity. Humans are flawed, imperfect and innately evil, twisted organisms. Organized religion only brings out the worst of humanity by manipulating evil traits in concert. This is why SATAN should be our savior. Satan promotes free-will and does not require a supremely organized hierarchy. Satan does not deny innately human traits. Satan only wishes not to be fucked with. That's something I can deal with. God is an asshole disguised as an angel. The universe is too massive to focus on a single species. God has no gain from aiding the human species. It makes no sense that God has some sort of affinity for humans.

What makes more sense is that "God" is some sort of quantum presence -- the Higgs boson is a candidate, because it explains matter and how it interacts. In this sense, we're all "God." I am God. You are God. Every object is God. Of course, this would require me to go knee-deep in particle physics, which I'm not an expert in.

The logic of an evolutionist is akin to a man standing in the Library of Congress and staring up in wonder at the various levels containing millions of books - all sorted according to author, subject and date, and thinking to himself, "I'll bet you this whole place was just a random accident. Somehow these books wrote themselves, then managed to get themselves up on those shelves, and then they sorted themselves once they were up there. Wood particles in the air, over billions of years, mind you, eventually came together to form the paper. Then microbes from the air kept landing on the paper, and eventually, after billions of years, those microbes wrote all the books by trial and error. After the microbes wrote every single book in the entire library, all those billions of pages were subjected to a billion earthquakes, which eventually put all the pages of every book in order and separated all the ordered pages into their respective volumes. After that, the rays from the Sun, after billions of years mind you, fried the edges of the sorted volumes the earthquakes had left, gluing them together into books. The microbes then came back again, over time mind you, and settled down on the arranged book volumes, leaving behind completely random titles on the covers that actually ended up to be the right ones completely by accident (the covers themselves were brought into the library by freak tornadoes over billions of years). Next, the wind pushed all the books into alphabetical order and ingeniously sorted them correctly according to author, title and subject (after billions of years of the wind pushing the books around this way and that, mind you) until they all ended up there on the shelves due to the unpredictable and active nature of teh wind. That's how all those books got up there... by the simply and obvious process of evolution of the library over billions of years."

Trolling? Again, too obvious. That's the most stupid analogy I've ever heard.

Here's why that library came to be: One day a human decided to take all the books and put them in one place. These books were created by other authors, all of whom apparently had something to say. Both of these actions can be explained by basic psychology: Humans push to gather information. Humans survived the harsh Ice Ages because they gathered information to become adaptable rather than utilize brute force (this is why the last Neanderthal remaining appears to be Spectral). How did this brain evolve? Well in the beginning, there was a soup of simple organic compounds, which then went through various energetic reactions to form basic amino acids and nucleic acids -- we can do this in the lab and we already see these basic organics on celestial bodies light years away. Mind you that these reactions occur within seconds. A million years is roughly equivalent to 3.15*10^13 seconds. That number is absolutely massive. MASSIVE. There are 1000 million years in a billion years. The two most important organic molecules are amino acids and nucleic acids (lipids and other compounds came about much later). Both of these molecules share the ability to dehydrate and form polymeric bonds. Over thousands of years, perhaps one strand of RNA appeared the most resilient. At one point, lipids began to appear. Lipids will form globules called micelles due to hydrophobic/hydrophilic interactions. These globules do not need nucleic acids to replicate. When they grow large enough, they divide. Lipids can form spontaneously under reducing atmospheres (early Earth had plenty of hydrogen gas to go around). At one point, this resilient RNA strand was encased in a lipid globule. Nucleic acids can form spontaneously. Proteins can form spontaneously. Combine the two with membrane-like globules and you open the doors to a big ass game of randomness. Every 10 or so seconds, a small peptide or nucleic acid might've been formed. Imagine that over millions of years. The peptide-nucleic acid combinations that did seem to self-replicate would be able to do so and increase population. Hence starts the complex process of "evolution."

Now this all adheres to the RNA-world theory of abiogenesis, but note that DNA is simply a complementary RNA strand bound to another by hydrogen bonding -- which forms spontaneously. Theoretically, other modifications that distinguished DNA from RNA came later (for example, the presence of deoxyribose in DNA and uracil in RNA).

Never underestimate the power of the atom. It's because of the nature of charged particles that molecules form.

It's because of molecular interactions with the 5HT2A receptor (which allows one to access all walks of the brain, subconscious and conscious) that acid trips are so damn beautiful. Not God.

[TheSexyBeast821]

It's a pity. I've never seen a more obvious trolling attempt.

If God exists, God does not care about humanity. Humans are flawed, imperfect and innately evil, twisted organisms. Organized religion only brings out the worst of humanity by manipulating evil traits in concert. This is why SATAN should be our savior. Satan promotes free-will and does not require a supremely organized hierarchy. Satan does not deny innately human traits. Satan only wishes not to be fucked with. That's something I can deal with. God is an asshole disguised as an angel. The universe is too massive to focus on a single species. God has no gain from aiding the human species. It makes no sense that God has some sort of affinity for humans.

What makes more sense is that "God" is some sort of quantum presence -- the Higgs boson is a candidate, because it explains matter and how it interacts. In this sense, we're all "God." I am God. You are God. Every object is God. Of course, this would require me to go knee-deep in particle physics, which I'm not an expert in.


Have fun with the void inside you that you are trying to fill with the Higgs Boson. I'll continue on experiencing grace, love, and joy in abundance.

[Aperson444]

Have fun with the void inside you that you are trying to fill with the Higgs Boson. I'll continue on experiencing grace, love, and joy in abundance.

Doesn't matter. Did you not hear?

I AM FUCKING GOD

[TheSexyBeast821]

Doesn't matter. Did you not hear?

I AM FUCKING GOD

Contact me inside my own head via the Holy Spirit and I will agree with your statement that you are one part of the Holy Trinity. Oh wait, your belief system doesn't allow that. In fact, it's more likely that I will contact you inside of your head and proclaim God is real, and He happens to not be you.

[-SpectraL]

...Well in the beginning, there was a soup of simple organic compounds, which then went through various energetic reactions....Before we begin, I have a simple question:

Where did the "soup of simple organic compounds" come from?

[Ph0x]

We Are All Made Of Stars - YouTube

[Aperson444]

Contact me inside my own head via the Holy Spirit and I will agree with your statement that you are one part of the Holy Trinity. Oh wait, your belief system doesn't allow that. In fact, it's more likely that I will contact you inside of your head and proclaim God is real, and He happens to not be you.

God (I) works in strange ways. You will see me in your head someday when the right time comes, my child.

Also, you don't even know what I look like or sound like. How can you be so sure?

Again, I am God.

Where did the "soup of simple organic compounds" come from?

Pretty sure I explained this in another thread. Though that might've been with Figure-8.

You start with a hydrogen nucleon. Hydrogen undergoes fusion to helium. As time progresses, heavier elements form. Fusion simply requires a lot of energy. Nucleons are made up of quantum particles (quarks, strings, whatever school of particle physics you follow). This is why I suggested that God is some sort of quantum particle within every object.

[Ph0x]

You are aware that "organic" just means a molecule that contains carbon, right?

Glycerol Trinitrate is an organic chemical.

[Zanick]

Like I said before, you atheists have no chance of competing with God. One gives me an abundance of love and joy, while the others preach an endless internal void that can never be filled disguised as rationality.

What would happen if God couldn't make you feel that way anymore? Would you still believe?

[Zanick]

If God exists, God does not care about humanity. Humans are flawed, imperfect and innately evil, twisted organisms. Organized religion only brings out the worst of humanity by manipulating evil traits in concert. This is why SATAN should be our savior. Satan promotes free-will and does not require a supremely organized hierarchy. Satan does not deny innately human traits. Satan only wishes not to be fucked with. That's something I can deal with. God is an asshole disguised as an angel. The universe is too massive to focus on a single species. God has no gain from aiding the human species. It makes no sense that God has some sort of affinity for humans.

How do you know that? What if this is the human condition, at the peak of its own experience? Maybe any other configuration would simply not do, making it too hard or too easy. Don't confuse our struggles with our inherent qualities. If there is a creative force watching over us, chances are we're exactly where it wants us, for better or for worse.

[Aperson444]

You are aware that "organic" just means a molecule that contains carbon, right?

My point = organic chemicals form spontaneously and amino acids are organic chemicals. They form spontaneously.

[Rust]

If there is a creative force watching over us, chances are we're exactly where it wants us, for better or for worse.

"Chances are"? Is that a nice way of saying "I have no fucking clue what the fuck I'm talking about but I'll qualify it so I can speak out of my ass"?

[Aperson444]

How do you know that? What if this is the human condition, at the peak of its own experience? Maybe any other configuration would simply not do, making it too hard or too easy. Don't confuse our struggles with our inherent qualities. If there is a creative force watching over us, chances are we're exactly where it wants us, for better or for worse.


So how does such a creative force manage other possible lifeforms? What makes us special? Why not make humanity flawless?

[TheSexyBeast821]

God (I) works in strange ways. You will see me in your head someday when the right time comes, my child.

Also, you don't even know what I look like or sound like. How can you be so sure?

Again, I am God.


What sort of person fancies himself a god if he can't even fix the void inside himself?

What would happen if God couldn't make you feel that way anymore? Would you still believe?

My beliefs aren't founded on positive feelings, so yes I would still believe.

[Aperson444]

What sort of person fancies himself a god if he can't even fix the void inside himself?

But TSB, I am God. I can fill all voids remember?

[-SpectraL]

...You start with a hydrogen nucleon...Holdup. You're getting way ahead of yourself. First please explain where the hydrogen nucleon originated from.

[Zanick]

So how does such a creative force manage other possible lifeforms? What makes us special? Why not make humanity flawless?

For all we know, we may be flawless already. Man dreams of something else, something more, but ultimately doesn't escape his own nature. Maybe nature is perfect already, and we don't need to separate from it; and maybe this is on purpose.

[Rust]

For all we know, we may be flawless already. Man dreams of something else, something more, but ultimately doesn't escape his own nature. Maybe nature is perfect already, and we don't need to separate from it; and maybe this is on purpose.

And maybe pink unicorns rape you in your sleep every night. Adding "maybe" to a sentence does not a valid argument make. Do you have a reason to think that we are flawless?

[Aperson444]

For all we know, we may be flawless already. Man dreams of something else, something more, but ultimately doesn't escape his own nature. Maybe nature is perfect already, and we don't need to separate from it; and maybe this is on purpose.

So intraspecies killing is OK, because we're perfect? We can wipe each other out with the push of a button. Sounds legit.

Holdup. You're getting way ahead of yourself. First please explain where the hydrogen nucleon originated from.

... If you read my post

Nucleons are made up of quantum particles (quarks, strings, whatever school of particle physics you follow). This is why I suggested that God is some sort of quantum particle within every object.

Particles are not found in free state within nature, so they come together spontaneously.

[TheSexyBeast821]

But TSB, I am God. I can fill all voids remember?

Be careful what you wish for.

[-SpectraL]

...quantum particles...The quantum particles had to have come from somewhere, since it's physically and scientifically impossible to get something from nothing. Even if they came into existence spontaneously, there had to be a source for this spontaneity to draw from. Care to explain what that source would be in your world of make-believe?

[Aperson444]

The quantum particles had to have come from somewhere, since it's physically and scientifically impossible to get something from nothing. Even if they came into existence spontaneously, there had to be a source for this spontaneity to draw from. Care to explain what that source would be in your world of make-believe?

If you read my post before, I hypothesized that "God" is a quantum particle. The Higgs boson is a likely candidate. I could go on and on about some of the theories that astrophysicists and theoretical physicists have come up with to explain the origins of such particles. Some suggest an infinite cycle of interactions similar to the big bang.

Don't forget that all physical objects rest on the fabric of space-time.

Another theory is that all universes come to an end, all matter disintegrates and is recycled. Sort of like atomic reincarnation, so to speak.

[TheSexyBeast821]

If you read my post before, I hypothesized that "God" is a quantum particle. The Higgs boson is a likely candidate. I could go on and on about some of the theories that astrophysicists and theoretical physicists have come up with to explain the origins of such particles. Some suggest an infinite cycle of interactions similar to the big bang.

Don't forget that all physical objects rest on the fabric of space-time.

Another theory is that all universes come to an end, all matter disintegrates and is recycled. Sort of like atomic reincarnation, so to speak.

Actually you said that you were God.

[-SpectraL]

..."God" is a quantum particle....And where did this quantum particle originate from?

[Aperson444]

Actually you said that you were God.

If you read my initial posts, I claimed that I'm God because I am made up of sub-subatomic particles which dictate the interactions and properties of matter.

And where did this quantum particle originate from?

Since when does God come from somewhere? That suggestion indicated that perhaps this "God" you all seek is some omnipotent, omnipresent quantum particle with no free will.

Here's something to chew on: When scientists were studying properties of light, they wanted to figure out if light was a particle or a wave. They set up diffraction experiments to test this, but every time they attempted to observe the particle, it would act like a wave OR a particle. This is called the wave particle duality, but the really amazing thing is that somehow the particle (a photon) "knew" that humans were watching. This can be explained by the mathematical interpretation of dimensions I present below.

But, it's possible that we're stuck in an infinite loop of universes. If you take a look at the mathematical/physical interpretations of dimensions, you will find that the 4th dimension represents a linear continuum (it seems linear to us) of time -- a timeline so to speak. A 4-D object would appear to be several 3-D objects moving in different "frames." A 5-D object similarly includes all possibilities of an object. All possibilities of time. The 6th dimension simply allows travel between 5th dimensional planes. The 8th/9th dimensions can be said to represent all possible universes.

When you think about the universe in this manner, you realize that our existence is a single point in an infinite plane sitting in an infinite space. All possibilities can occur. Most of the evidence for these mind-boggling visualizations come from mathematical proofs which unite many leading theories in physics (Maxwell's equations etc).

Monotheistic/anthropotheistic beliefs are ignorant of this fact that everything is possible. They quash the power of free will and indicate that we are to follow under one, in the domain of one, when we are really in the domain of infinity.

For further reference, I recommend some in depth mathematics -- vector calculus and partial differential equations will come in handy. Once you do the math, you will realize that many physical properties can be traced back to multiple dimensions -- the infinity. I suggest starting with basic equations in physics, such as the Schrodinger equation.

These particles seem to exist as omnipresent entities in a plane of infinity -- all possibilities of universes which share the same physical properties. Quantum particles are cross-dimensional conduits, so to speak. I'm not a particle physicist, so don't take my word for it, but you will find that string theory often explores this concept.

[Ph0x]

My point = organic chemicals form spontaneously and amino acids are organic chemicals. They form spontaneously.

I was speaking to SpeC~ but clearly you didn't know that either, God.

[Ph0x]

Holdup. You're getting way ahead of yourself. First please explain where the hydrogen nucleon originated from.

Where did god come from?

[Aperson444]

I was speaking to SpeC~ but clearly you didn't know that either, God.

lolwut?

Carbon can form organic molecules because it is tetravalent, can bond with itself and can assemble into chains. That's pretty much why biomolecules exist -- carbon can self assemble.

[TheSexyBeast821]

If you read my initial posts, I claimed that I'm God because I am made up of sub-subatomic particles which dictate the interactions and properties of matter.



Since when does God come from somewhere? That suggestion indicated that perhaps this "God" you all seek is some omnipotent, omnipresent quantum particle with no free will.

Here's something to chew on: When scientists were studying properties of light, they wanted to figure out if light was a particle or a wave. They set up diffraction experiments to test this, but every time they attempted to observe the particle, it would act like a wave OR a particle. This is called the wave particle duality, but the really amazing thing is that somehow the particle (a photon) "knew" that humans were watching. This can be explained by the mathematical interpretation of dimensions I present below.

But, it's possible that we're stuck in an infinite loop of universes. If you take a look at the mathematical/physical interpretations of dimensions, you will find that the 4th dimension represents a linear continuum (it seems linear to us) of time -- a timeline so to speak. A 4-D object would appear to be several 3-D objects moving in different "frames." A 5-D object similarly includes all possibilities of an object. All possibilities of time. The 6th dimension simply allows travel between 5th dimensional planes. The 8th/9th dimensions can be said to represent all possible universes.

When you think about the universe in this manner, you realize that our existence is a single point in an infinite plane sitting in an infinite space. All possibilities can occur. Most of the evidence for these mind-boggling visualizations come from mathematical proofs which unite many leading theories in physics (Maxwell's equations etc).

Monotheistic/anthropotheistic beliefs are ignorant of this fact that everything is possible. They quash the power of free will and indicate that we are to follow under one, in the domain of one, when we are really in the domain of infinity.

For further reference, I recommend some in depth mathematics -- vector calculus and partial differential equations will come in handy. Once you do the math, you will realize that many physical properties can be traced back to multiple dimensions -- the infinity. I suggest starting with basic equations in physics, such as the Schrodinger equation.

These particles seem to exist as omnipresent entities in a plane of infinity -- all possibilities of universes which share the same physical properties. Quantum particles are cross-dimensional conduits, so to speak. I'm not a particle physicist, so don't take my word for it, but you will find that string theory often explores this concept.

Math is an abstract system that used to correlate to reality, but has been taken so far that it doesn't correspond with reality anymore, it only corresponds with math. Math doesn't make reality, reality made math, and now math has been taken to the extreme of abstract absurdity. The fundamental cause of reality is consciousness - God.

[Aperson444]

Math is an abstract system that used to correlate to reality, but has been taken so far that it doesn't correspond with reality anymore, it only corresponds with math. Math doesn't make reality, reality made math, and now math has been taken to the extreme of abstract absurdity. The fundamental cause of reality is consciousness - God.

Please explain to me how all four of Maxwell's laws are bullshit and how Schrodinger's equation and all that differential calculus is wasting my time.

Math is the only way we can visualize other dimensions -- which pretty much must exist. We can't see in the 4th or 5th dimension.

Trust me, I'm God, I know.

[TheSexyBeast821]

Please explain to me how all four of Maxwell's laws are bullshit and how Schrodinger's equation and all that differential calculus is wasting my time.

Math is the only way we can visualize other dimensions -- which pretty much must exist. We can't see in the 4th or 5th dimension.

Trust me, I'm God, I know.

If you were God you would know that there are 5 dimensions. The 4 we live in and the 5th being pure consciousness, ie God.

[Ph0x]

lolwut?

Carbon can form organic molecules because it is tetravalent, can bond with itself and can assemble into chains. That's pretty much why biomolecules exist -- carbon can self assemble.

Cool, you can wikipedia too.

You kind gave away the fact you didn't know when you replied to it.

When you throw a rock and hit a dog, it barks.

[Aperson444]

Cool, you can wikipedia too.

You kind gave away the fact you didn't know when you replied to it.

When you throw a rock and hit a dog, it barks.

Uh, I thought you were talking to me and not Spectral. I replied because I was curious as to what you were getting at.

Also your definition is faulty, because the carbonate anion contains carbon, but is not organic. Generally, you have to see carbon bonded with some hydrogens or non-polar entities.

If you were God you would know that there are 5 dimensions. The 4 we live in and the 5th being pure consciousness, ie God.

The 5th dimension represents all possibilities of time. The 4th dimension represents a seemingly linear time continuum for all 3 dimensional objects (i.e us).

[Ph0x]

Uh, I thought you were talking to me and not Spectral. I replied because I was curious as to what you were getting at.

Also your definition is faulty, because the carbonate anion contains carbon, but is not organic. Generally, you have to see carbon bonded with some hydrogens or non-polar entities.



The 5th dimension represents all possibilities of time. The 4th dimension represents a seemingly linear time continuum for all 3 dimensional objects (i.e us).


Simple explanations for simple people.

I once tried to explain how to figure out how accurate of a scale you need for different masses. No one could get past a 0.001g scale can't measure to 1.0mg. Since then I'm trying to keep shit simple. You just slipped up and proved you're playing Wikipedia warrior.

[Aperson444]

You just slipped up and proved you're playing Wikipedia warrior.

How so? If anything, it's like textbook warrior. The first thing you read in your Organic Chemistry textbook is that carbon is tetravalent and can bond with itself... It's kind of a self evident fact if you've taken any level of high school chemistry. Don't even need Wikipedia.