Originally posted by vivifyIs this your childish way of throwing stones in cyber space.( rhetorical Q )
From Dasa's RHP profile:
* Important: Please ignore all of my public forum postings from about July10th 2010 back to the beginning of postings. (or in other words about the first 24 pages of postings) give or take a few.
* It was not the current Dasa speaking at the time - but someone else.
So which Dasa is currently communicating? Can you switch whi ...[text shortened]... ur personalities post on this forum? Is there one who's less irritating than the one before us?
Originally posted by DasaI don't think that scientists working on abiogenesis expect a single lightening flash to have created life. The current idea is that meteorite collisions created complex organic molecules on the early earth. There is rather more than that to creating a living cell from scratch. What took a considerable amount of time was to get from these complex organic molecules to the first photosynthesisers, never mind something as complicated as an eukaryotic cell. The meteorite collisions or lightening produced building blocks, more stages were needed after that.
The answer is simple.
Apparently according to science .......it took a mere accident for life to be created by a lightning flash and a puddle of primordial soup.
So remember that science can imitate a flash and they have all the chemicals at hand.
If a simple accident can create life .........then a thousand phd. scientists should be able to do it.
...[text shortened]... ot the appearance of life)
So why hasn,t science created life (if a dumb accident can do it?)
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe real truth is that it never happened by accident, long time or no. God did it. It is as simple as that for God. Man is stupid. That is why you can't do it. 😏
I don't think that scientists working on abiogenesis expect a single lightening flash to have created life. The current idea is that meteorite collisions created complex organic molecules on the early earth. There is rather more than that to creating a living cell from scratch. What took a considerable amount of time was to get from these complex orga ...[text shortened]... meteorite collisions or lightening produced building blocks, more stages were needed after that.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtBut these meteorites are still all made of atoms.
I don't think that scientists working on abiogenesis expect a single lightening flash to have created life. The current idea is that meteorite collisions created complex organic molecules on the early earth. There is rather more than that to creating a living cell from scratch. What took a considerable amount of time was to get from these complex orga ...[text shortened]... meteorite collisions or lightening produced building blocks, more stages were needed after that.
Science MUST admit life is not made from atoms ..............so the meteorite argument falls flat.
Science becomes dishonest when they refuse to admit life is spiritual.
Will you (in this forum) admit that life is spiritual?...........and become honest.
NOTE: What we are talking about has nothing to do with religion..........(its all about chemistry and logic and truth.)
Originally posted by DasaHe said:
But these meteorites are still all made of atoms.
Science MUST admit life is not made from atoms ..............so the meteorite argument falls flat.
Science becomes dishonest when they refuse to admit life is spiritual.
Will you (in this forum) admit that life is spiritual?...........and become honest.
NOTE: What we are talking about has nothing to do with religion..........(its all about chemistry and logic and truth.)
The current idea is that meteorite collisions created complex organic molecules on the early earth.
This would be a violation of the Law of Biogenesis.
... (Anything organic is derived from the living.)
The Holy Bible teaches that there is a difference between the spiritual life and the natural material life.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
(1 Corinthians 2:14 KJV)
Originally posted by RJHinds
He said:The current idea is that meteorite collisions created complex [b]organicmolecules on the early earth.
This would be a violation of the Law of Biogenesis.
... (Anything organic is derived from the living.)
The Holy Bible teaches that there is a difference between the spiritual life and the natural material life.[/b]The LAW of biogenesis? Hardly a law, more like wishful thinking. Also, complex organic molecules ARE known to exist in meteorites and comets so that is a fact, not subject to debate.
31 Mar 15
Originally posted by sonhouseThis is an example that is more like wishful thinking:
The LAW of biogenesis? Hardly a law, more like wishful thinking. Also, complex organic molecules ARE known to exist in meteorites and comets so that is a fact, not subject to debate.
Complex organic molecule found in interstellar space
Scientists have found the beginnings of life-bearing chemistry at the centre of the galaxy.
Iso-propyl cyanide has been detected in a star-forming cloud 27,000 light-years from Earth.
Its branched carbon structure is closer to the complex organic molecules of life than any previous finding from interstellar space.
The discovery suggests the building blocks of life may be widespread throughout our galaxy.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29368984
Originally posted by DasaWhy does it mean that to be an atheist and a science person as well...................that you become dishonest.
Why does it mean that to be an atheist and a science person as well...................that you become dishonest.
Its like as soon as the science person decides to be an atheist............that their intelligence is plucked from their body and they become instantly dishonest.
Science shall never create life................( and why cant science create life ...[text shortened]... that.
So there is a million silly scientists out there all trying to created life with atoms.
Hi, I think this would fail the green
it is green isn't it!? I'm a linux dude, can't remember whether it's green or blue
squiggly line testThe MS Absurd green squiggly line test, that is.
. I didn't check the rest of your post.
Hope this helps 🙂