The origin of everything

Plus, once life came into existence it started evolving. Life doing what it naturally does results in evolution.Therefore, the entire question of whether life arose naturally or supernaturally is moot! It doesn't matter!Nor does life having arisen naturally rule out "some spook that we know nothing about", except instead using magical methods it used natural processes which any actual creationist (instead of fake creationists like candle2) would realize.Though we just shrug off that idea as an unnecessary complication that contributes nothing. I just offer it to show that creationists' perceived conflict between evolution and a Creator is also moot. It doesn't matter.

Ringo, we know that the moon rotates. It is a proven
fact.There isn't simply evidence that the moon rotates, there
is proof that the moon rotates. At least there is proof to
those of us use who employ operational/empirical
scientific techniques.Science is a tool by which we investigate the universe
around us. Science doesn't take side; scientists do.What I mean by your paradigm is that you are totally lost
concerning how life began, and about how millions of
unique organisms came to be.You should stop trying to convince others that they are
wrong when you are unable to even know what you,
yourself, believes.You remind me of someone who has never had kids
trying to tell those of us with kids how to raise them.There is nothing to suggest that complex chemicals
created life. In fact, no one (outside of God) can say
how all the complex chemicals were created.Magical chemicals.

Dwise 1, all you can say with any degree of certainty is
that you know nothing about (God) what you call a spook.You simply do not know what those who have a
relationship with God know.

What was the last thing god said to you in this relationship?

Science does not deal in proof. Learn that. Science does not deal in proof. Learn that. If you talk about proof, you are NOT employing operational/empirical
scientific techniques.Science does not deal in proof. Learn that.If you continue blathering about proof, I am going to correct you every time. Try to be wrong about something else for a change. Not at all. I know that life came from non-life by chemical reactions and that millions of unique organisms came to be by evolution. Chemistry happens. It can not be stopped. Evolution happens. It can not be stopped.YOU, on the other hand are totally lost concerning HOW your god created anything. It isn't about belief. I don't need to believe anything about how life came to be. I have something better than belief: knowledge.Granted, I don't have a lot of knowledge about biology. I haven't taken a biology class since high school. But I know enough kindergarten-level evolution to try to explain it to you - if you're willing to learn anything. I do know a thing or two about chemistry (at least the university thought so), so feel free to ask questions about that.I'm not trying to "convince" anybody, least of all you, of anything. I'm just pointing out the truth, as I understand it. (You may notice that it isn't the smart people who are disagreeing with me; it's only you.) So, according to you, I know nothing about science and I'm trying to teach you, who knows all about science. We'll see. Sure there is. We know a lot about chemicals. We know a lot about how complex chemicals come from simple chemicals. (I took a whole semester on organic synthesis - and that was just an introduction to what is known.)We know that simple chemicals can spontaneously form amino acids. We know that chemicals can form membranes. We know a lot about the chemistry that goes on inside a cell, using nutrients to produce energy and cell components. We're not that far away from being able to synthesize a living cell in the lab. So you admit that you know NOTHING about how it happened. Figuratively, yes, chemicals are magical. But we can understand the magic. It's predictable.Go ahead and ask questions.

The moon is stationary. The earth goes around the moon.You cannot prove otherwise. It's a matter of how you look at it.The moon going around the earth just makes for a more useful way of looking at things. But this is pragmatics, not proof.

Jessica H. Christ! What is wrong with you? I did not say what you falsely accuse me of saying. Are you truly incapable of reading? Or are you being a typical creationist and deliberately lying?Here is what I had actually written in Message 91 -- read it this time! (and don't complain that your phone screen is too small for you to read anything on it --use your computer, you idiot!): It was very clearly ringo who called your god a "spook", not me! Look at what you are getting in my face about: Do you see those double tick-marks before "some" and after "about"? Those are called quotation marks and they are used to quote what somebody else said. Apparently this is an idea that you have never encountered before, but most people are quite familiar with it and are able to recognize it immediately.And, yes, we do know and understand a lot about your god, the many other versions of "the Christian God", and the other gods as well. Along with the religions and myths which accompany them. And of the Bible, what it says, how it was written, etc.Obviously, a helluva lot more than you know or understand. You hypocrite!You whine that (in Message 82): And then you do the exact same thing you accuse us of doing to you. That is the kind of hypocrisy that you fundies pull constantly which we normals object to.And to remind you, since you have obviously chosen to refuse to read it, in Message 86 I replied to you: Well? 
You still need to actually reply to my Message 91 to which you just "replied" with a blatant false accusation: Or is "moot" too big of a word for you to understand? Or to be able to read on your phone's tiny screen?You also still need to reply to my having to explain what "evolution" means in my Message 86. 
And do follow that link in "Jessica H. Christ!". You should find it interesting. Or are you afraid of learning something (I do realize that learning is against your religion).

Ringo, take some chemicals and create life.Never has it been shown that chemicals can create life.
Yet, evolutionists cling to this ridiculous assertion.And, yes men applying the scientific techniques have
proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the moon
rotates. It is a fact.Centuries of observations have clearly shown that life
comes from previous life of the same kind.You might not like to hear this, but it is what it is.

When I was younger my friends and I would gather at the park. We took chemicals to alleviate boredom.Once I went with some of them to a Grateful Dead concert. I took some chemicals to enjoy the music and the experience. One time I took too many chemicals and saw ANGELS AND demons wrestling on the mountainside! (Everyone else just saw color trails and saw the music while hearing colors.
I never took chemicals to create life, but I have always taken them to alleviate pain, enhance life, and perhaps to create arguments reasoned discussions. In my opinion, if a Pastor does not have the Holy Spirit, they may as well smoke pot and join us in the park. You might not like to hear this, but it is what it is.

We're working on it. Keep watching the news. I bet it'll happen before your Jesus comes back. It has been understood for a long time that chemicals CAN create life. Life is MADE of chemicals. Given the right conditions, chemicals can not be prevented from doing what they do. Even a miracle can not stop chemistry. it has nothing to do with evolution. Try to be wrong about one thing at a time. Nope. Still wrong. It is a fact that the moon rotates but science does not deal in "proof". Proof is for judges and mathematicians. But no observation has ever shown that chemicals can not do what they DO do.

Can you prove an alternative?

SO WHAT?You seem to think that your question is important. Why?Do you think that it somehow presents a problem for evolution? Again, why would it? Why should it?As you have already been informed (by having read my Message 91 to which you "replied" albeit without understanding any of it), once life has come into existence, completely and utterly regardless of how, then that life would be evolving. Evolution is what happens when life does what life does; given life there is no way to keep evolution from happening.Therefore, any question of whether life emerge through supernatural agency or through natural processes is rendered moot! For that matter, even if life arose through natural processes that still does not in any way negate a Divine Creator as an actual creationist would surely know (though fake creationists like you YECs are still in the dark).Any and all questions concerning abiogenesis have absolutely no bearing on whether life evolves. You're just wasting your time trying to attack evolution through abiogenesis. So what's your problem?Which leaves us yet again with the same question for you and all other fake creationists (which is what YECs are): What the hell are you talking about? Do you even have any clue what you are talking about?What the hell are you talking about? And, what you mean by evolutionist? Do you simply mean someone who accepts evolution? Well then in that case most creationists (actual ones, not you fake ones) are also "evolutionists" since most of the people who accept evolution also believe in a Creator God (eg, biologist and one of the most effective opponents of YEC's "creation science", Dr. Kenneth Miller, self-describes as a "creationist" since, as a practicing and believing Catholic, he believes in God the Creator -- I can cite the article for you and transcribe that part of for you, except you would yet again refuse to read it as you usually do in your typical willful stupidity).So yet again, what the hell are you talking about? Because nothing you are saying makes any sense at all! 

See: Researchers may have solved origin-of-life conundrum
Study explains how three essential molecules could have formed simultaneouslyScience | AAAS

Have a nice day.TRG

I, Claudius (1976)Moose