Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,906 Year: 4,163/9,624 Month: 1,034/974 Week: 361/286 Day: 4/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The irresolvability of the creation/evolution debate
chemscience
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 98 (486597)
10-23-2008 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Aven
11-10-2007 11:15 AM


Re: Welcome to EvC
Endlessly repeating: “evolution is science” doesn’t make it so, but only ignores the impossibilities of the theory and a mindset rejecting evidence, or unexposed thereto.
The same goes for religion in general and Christendom in particular. I’ll start there:
A. Standard religious Dogma:
1. We’re immortal beings who cannot die
2. God is love
3. He’ll fry most/us in everlasting agony even if we never heard of him.
4. He’s an incomprehensible trinity who frequently prayed to himself
5. He’s the Prince of Peace.
6. In his service we must slaughter each other wholesale if Caesar asks it
7. The clergy are his collection agents, pay 10% (pretax)
8. God Created the universe in 144 hours
9. Satan put the fossils there to test our faith
10. God will eradicate the universe when he comes back(must have messed up)
11. He promised “The meek will inherit the earth” but he’ll burn it!
12. Good folks all go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.
The above illogic motivated ones to conjecture an alternative:
B. Evolutionary idiocy (More or less standard dogma):
1. Every effect must have an equal cause
2. 100 billion galaxies were compressed into a point smaller than an atom
3. Came now the Big Bang
4. Don’t ask what made the BB, it was a Singularity. O ye weak of faith!
5. The universe has less than 10% of the matter required for the BB
6. So there must be Dark Matter, it’s never been found, but believe!
7. There’s also Dark Energy, ditto
8. The early non-oxygenic atmosphere was poisonous methane, ammonia, etc.
9. Lightning created oceans full of an amino-acid “prebiotic soup”
10. 100s of AAs accidentally became proteins, Just levo, left handed ones
11. Amino acid links, a dehydrating process, can't happen in H2O but did!
12. Without ozone/oxygen, solar radiation is lethal to life, but the AAs
and proteins survived
13. Suddenly the atmosphere converted to Nitrogen & Oxygen, No one knows
how.
14. Abiogenesis has never been demonstrated, but it made everything alive.
15. All living things are accidents, without design or purpose
16. Accidentalism (“evolution”) took 2 billion years to produce all life
17. Yet the first metazoan fossils, trilobites, etc are only 543 million
years old and had no daddys & mommys
18. There were at least 9 extinctions, five major, the Permian event
killed 99% of species (By recent estimates)
19. A Montana T-Rex with elastic odiferous tissue is nevertheless
70,000,000 years old
20. The Lewis Overthrust, 800 Trillion tons/rock slid 50 miles sideways,
left no trace of abrasion & ground rock between layers
“Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Declared Louis Bounoure, President of the Biological Society of Strasssbourg,Director of the French National Center of Scientific Research.
Prof D. M. S. Watson, 20 year Chairman/Evolution Univ/London: “Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is incredible.”
A PLAGUE ON BOTH THESE HOUSES!!
CHEMSCIENCE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Aven, posted 11-10-2007 11:15 AM Aven has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Coyote, posted 10-23-2008 12:44 AM chemscience has not replied
 Message 37 by Huntard, posted 10-23-2008 1:52 AM chemscience has not replied

  
chemscience
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 98 (487244)
10-29-2008 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Admin
10-23-2008 6:12 AM


Should I answer Huntard?
I take it that any further response by me to Coyote & Huntard is off limits. I would like to answer them, is there any way I can without violating protocol?
Thanx for guidance!
CHEMSCIENCE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Admin, posted 10-23-2008 6:12 AM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Larni, posted 10-29-2008 7:27 AM chemscience has not replied
 Message 41 by Stile, posted 10-30-2008 9:58 AM chemscience has not replied
 Message 42 by Huntard, posted 10-30-2008 1:09 PM chemscience has not replied

  
chemscience
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 98 (487389)
10-30-2008 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by onifre
10-30-2008 1:20 PM


Re: Should I answer Huntard?
Onifre, thanks for offering to open up a thread, which boon I gladly accept. Please include both my original post and Huntard's reply as he offered to do.
I'm not intrested in a contest of insults & smart-aleck rejoinders.
I recognize the wide range of human understandings, opinions, backgrounds and pre-dispositions, which is what makes an intellectual ball game. Such should be played to find truth, not hullabloo.
I'll give evidence or qualified authority to support my positions, but some remarks will be simply my personal conclusions/convictions/beliefs. Please suggest how I might briefly identify such comments. It's only fair that others so identify their personal ideas if they are without authoritative support. Popularity isn't evidence of truth. Childbed fever killed thousands of mothers because doctors popularly agreed that handwashing between patients was an useless inconvenience.
####################################
Here's an interesting confirmation of Scriptural accuracy, and that of the New World Translation, in translating “Natah”
Job 9:8 Around the stars he puts a seal, STRETCHING out the heavens by himself
Job 27:3 He is STRETCHING out the north over the empty place, Hanging the
earth upon nothing
Psalm 104:2 Enwrapping yourself ... STRETCHING out the heavens like a tent
Isaiah 40:22 & 42:5 The One who is STRETCHING out the heavens as a fine gauze
51:13 Jehovah ... the One STRETCHING out the heavens
Zech 12:1 The One who is STRETCHING out the heavens
NATAH, a Hebrew imperfect verb indicates an action in progress; which is best
translated into the English, STRETCHING, present perfect tense, an action going on right now.
Other translations render it as “stretched”, past tense, all done
or “stretches”, indicative of present time, but less clear, or “spreads”.
WHY IS THE NWT RENDERING SIGNIFICANT? The $75 book GALAXIES explains:
“Astronomers discovered that remote galaxies are rushing apart from one
another, and us from them, at velocities directly proportional to their distance.” This universal expansion is shown by the “red shift” detected thru celestial observations. Light from distant galaxies shifts redward. Astronomers were reluctant to accept this “radical” phenomenon when it was discovered.
Expansion of the universe is illustrated by dots on a balloon. As it inflates the dots separate but maintain their relative positions. Thus our dynamic God pre-empted 20th century astronomers by telling us he is expanding the universe, and that was 35 centuries ago in Job and repetitively by subsequent prophets.
Again, Thank you, Onifre. Let's go!
CHEMSCIENCE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by onifre, posted 10-30-2008 1:20 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by onifre, posted 10-31-2008 12:05 PM chemscience has replied

  
chemscience
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 98 (487462)
10-31-2008 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by onifre
10-31-2008 12:05 PM


Re: Onifre Goodby!
ONIFRE, You proclaim:
"I don't think you have much of an argument other than what you've read on creationist websites but it'll be fun to find out...you know, for shits and giggles."
You scatalogically claim the intellectual high ground, by proclamation, not proof. This is a tactic common to closed minds.
I've participated in no creationist website; haven't read one in years; don't need to. Most insist on a 144 hour creation schedule that's poor exogesis and disregards geology, paleontology & astronomy. I've investigated the issue 50+ years.
I'll not swap insults with you. Your contempt for contray opinion is bad form. I see no gain in being the target of your giggles & XXXs.
Consider Pascal's Wager. Good by.
CHEMSCIENCE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by onifre, posted 10-31-2008 12:05 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by onifre, posted 10-31-2008 6:45 PM chemscience has replied

  
chemscience
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 98 (487501)
11-01-2008 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by onifre
10-31-2008 6:45 PM


Re: Onifre Hello Again!
An impressive apology, Onifre, which I accept. Let there be Peace and Dignity between us. We can disagree w/o being disagreeable. My feelings are intact, unhurt, but I do avoid dogfights.
You challenge my first post: “Your first post with the 20 or so things that are wrong about evolution was just flat out nonsense.”
I’ll not do all 20 right away, let’s see about the first 11:
The initial 7 have to do with cosmology, the origin/creation of the universe, 8-11 concern undirected assembly of the amino-acids from which the proteins in all living things are consstructed.
On the Origin of the Universe there are generally agreed to be only 2 possibilities. A. God created the both the design and substance of the universe. I hold this belief, which has a great economy for comprehension: God did it.
B. Somehow the universe designed and created itself out of nothing. Usually evolutionists believe this. This necessitates an infinite series of undirected fortunate events producing all creation.
My statements:
1. “Every effect must have an equal cause” derives from the 1st law of thermodynamics, which states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change forms.
2 & 3 “100 Billion galaxies were compressed into a point smaller than an atom: is the basic premise of the Big Bang paradigm, which posits that all matter & energy were originally compressed into a sub-microscopic point which exploded into our universe. BBT (Theory)holds that nothing existed prior to the BB
4. The explosion event is called a Singularity by believers. Right here comes an unanswerable objection which is expressed in Colin Ronan’s book “The Universe Explained”: “One of the most vexed questions facing astronomers is that of how much matter there is in the universe . results suggest there is barely 1% OF THE MASS THAT THE UNIVERSE SHOULD CONTAIN ACCORDING TO THE BIG BANG THEORY. There must be a vast amount of “dark matter that we simply cannot see.”
“There must be” is a statement of faith, metaphysics. There's no reality to this conjecture, it’s simply a patch required if you're committed to the BBT. The 1% figure has been fudged up to about 20% since the book was published in ’94 by Henry Holt & Co., New York. Believers agree most of the mass in the universe is invisible, doen't occlude or radiate light, and is undetectable except by arcane derivative ad-hoc theorizing. [Or it could be that they don’t understand gravity.] The universe doesn’t hold enough matter to fulfill the mathematics of the theory. The poet said:
As I was going up the stair. I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today, O how I wish he’d go away!
6 & 7 Dark matter & dark energy are now imagined to supply the necessary mass (weight) required to make the BBT possible. No one has seen either, they are simply ad-hoc propositions. But today’s osmologists fervently search/imagine/theorize their existence.
8. In 1952 H. Urey & Stanley Miller at the Univ/Chicago produced amino acids by exposing a mix of gasses (CO2, Methane CH4 & Ammonia NH3) to a 50,000 volt spark for a week. The reaction products were isolated from the energy source to prevent decomposition. They assumed that Earth’s early atmosphere was reducing, non-oxygenic, similar to the gas giants, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus; and lightning & cosmic radiation supplied the energy to duplicate their lab experiment, forming amino acids which precipitated into the sea until it became a vast “pre-biotic soup”.
This is called the “Spark in the Soup Theory “ in Richard Milner’s Encyclopedia of Evolution.
9. There’s no evidence at all that Earth had such an atmosphere, which would be evidenced geologically. It would be fatal to life. No one explains how it converted to the 78%N + 21%O we enjoy.
10. Amino acids are small structures, over 100 have been identified. Random synthesis produces equal quantities of right handed and left handed ones, but only levo, left-handed, are used in the proteins of all living things. There are 20 in our flesh, composed of 10 to 27 atoms each, variously assembled into 30-50,000 proteins some with 10,000 amino acids, strung together like beads on a chain which electrostatically influence their configuration with one another in such a way to form the specific molecules of life.
AAs are labil, break down easily. Linked AAs are called peptides. Proteins could be called large biological polypeptides. For example hemoglobin is a construction of 574 amino acids in 4 polypeptide chains. These are absolutely specific. Substitute Valine for Glutamic Acid at position 6 of the B chain and you get Sickle Cell Anemia.
11. The assembly of AAs into proteins takes place in our cells by a linkage which involves the loss of 2 Hydrogen atoms from the amino [NH3] site and the loss of an atom of oxygen form the carboxyl [CO2] site of the adjacent amino acid, forming a molecule of H2O. It’s a DEHYDRATION PROCESS and could not accumulate in the sea, nor persist, because peptides dissolve when hydrolyzed.
On authority lists 19 separate steps and dozens of enzymes required for protein synthesis within cells. The critical question is: Source of information? Where did the precise design for tens of thousands of proteins in you originate? Or for the tens of millions of species which have existed on our planet?
I think the doctrine this perfection of precision came without a designer is simply ludicrous! Your body also makes sugars, fats, DNA, and living cells more complicated than the electrical/communication systems of a city of millions. Consider the complexity of a single micro-organism which Jehovah placed in you to combat pathogenic invaders, T4 PHAGE, it hunts down and eats bacteria:
Molecular weight of its DNA: 120,000,000 120 million!
Specificity is 10 to the 78,000th power = 1 chance in 10 X 78,000 zeros.
No matter how many athiestic materialists shout the evidence down: it calls for a design & designer, who's name alone is Jehovah. Psalm 83:18
SO WHERE'S THE "FLAT OUT NONSENSE", ONIFRE?
CHEMSCIENCE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by onifre, posted 10-31-2008 6:45 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Huntard, posted 11-01-2008 4:00 AM chemscience has not replied
 Message 51 by onifre, posted 11-01-2008 9:21 AM chemscience has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024