The lies behind the Miller experiment

You should supply rather a lot more information before this can be considered as an adequate opening post (OP).You would have to describe your understanding of the Miller experiment, what it was intended to, or claimed to prove and why you think it didn't.You should also explain why you'd bring up a half century old rather primitive experiment.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.I know it is your first topic. It's not a bad one now.I merged post 3 into the opening post (OP) so that it can be refered to in one place.I might ask if you want me to change the topic title and remove the word lies. If you wish to leave it you're going to have to defend the assertion that someone is lying. That may distract from the main theme of the discussion. How about "Errors in use of the Miller Experiment" or something to that effect?This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 11-04-2004 10:20 AM

It happens that your, unsupported, "thought" doesn't really cut it. If various texts or National Geographic are misusing the Miller-Urey experiment then that is a problem with them. They are wrong to do so.You're going to have to start supporting what you say with specific references. I strongly suspect based on your misunderstanding of the science involved that you may not be reading these sources correctly. We now need to see quotes from these sources so they may be evaluated.I suggest you spend more time reading over posts here before you continue posting. We do have a forum to help people learn how to debate and you may earn a spot there in record time if you continue on your current vein.If you have any questions about exactly what problems are perceived with both the content and the style of your posts please post to the questions and suggestions forum.

JesusFreak, It is time to follow the forum guidelines.Your original opening post position has been shown to be false by all the information posted here. You have yet to supply any support for that position.It is time to retract what you've said or support it. Further comments of your own will not further the discussion.

This is rather off topic again WT.It has been patiently explained to you why you are here. If you still don't understand then I guess you will keep yourself here indefinitely.(as a little dig, since I just can't resist it, a specific example of why you are here is that you refuse to read a map and say how far the GP is from the sea. Your refusal to do that is an example of your lack of willingness to debate in good faith. It is simple.)

A much better try at carrying the discussion forward. Thank you.I'll leave it to others to point out detailed errors in your content.(well, no will power, just where was evolution mentioned there? )

Moose notes reasons for not.It was your topic originally, I'll leave it to you to pick what to do. It does seem to be tidied up nicely, which we don't always do with topics to say the least.