Evidence of NOAH's FLOOD

[John53]

Humanzees????

I believe I used to work with one.

 

[Monty]

I have answered all questions except some that are diversions, funny jokes., etc.

IOW triticale evolved from wheat and rye, and mules evolved from horses, and ligers evolved from lions, and humanzees evolved from humans, since you have no evidence they were created by a god.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I believe I used to work with one.

I've worked with some of the equine variety, but no humanzees.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

IOW triticale evolved from wheat and rye, and mules evolved from horses, and ligers evolved from lions, and humanzees evolved from humans, since you have no evidence they were created by a god.

Same Biblical kind. So that proves the Bible correct.
And Biblical kind evolving into another Biblical kind?

 

[Monty]

Same Biblical kind. So that proves the Bible correct.
And Biblical kind evolving into another Biblical kind?

IOW triticale evolved from wheat and rye since they are in the plant kind and have different genotypes and why they weren't created
And mules evolved from horses since they are in the animal kind and have different genotypes.
And ligers and tigons evolved from lions since they are in the animal kind too and have different genotypes.
And humanzees evolved from humans since they are in the animal kind too and have different genotypes.
IOW we evolved from a common ancestor with chimps since we are in the same kind and why we have different genotypes, and we didn't evolve from wheat or rye since they are in a different kind.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Same Biblical kind. So that proves the Bible correct.
And Biblical kind evolving into another Biblical kind?

You still do not understand the concept of proof. Heck you do not even understand the concept of evidence.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You still do not understand the concept of proof. Heck you do not even understand the concept of evidence.

I sure do. One infallible proof used mathematical induction, the other used the law of non contradiction.
And you cannot refute either, and no one has met the challenge I gave.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I sure do. One infallible proof used mathematical induction, the other used the law of non contradiction.
And you cannot refute either, and no one has met the challenge I gave.

No, you admitted that your mathematical induction "proof" failed when you ran away after I pointed out its flaws. Running away from an argument where you are being shown to be wrong is that same as admitting that you are wrong. Of course you could aways try to correct your gross errors.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

No, you admitted that your mathematical induction "proof" failed when you ran away after I pointed out its flaws. Running away from an argument where you are being shown to be wrong is that same as admitting that you are wrong. Of course you could aways try to correct your gross errors.

MI and the LNC proofs are infallible and prove that evolution, billions of years, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, Uniformitarianism, and the circular reasoning of dating the rock layers and fossils are all false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

MI and the LNC proofs are infallible and prove that evolution, billions of years, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, Uniformitarianism, and the circular reasoning of dating the rock layers and fossils are all false.

They are if done correctly. You did not do them correctly. I tried to explain that to you and you ran away. You treated them as magic spells and they are not that..

And please, you do not know what circular reasoning is. You have amply demonstrated that.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

They are if done correctly. You did not do them correctly. I tried to explain that to you and you ran away. You treated them as magic spells and they are not that..

And please, you do not know what circular reasoning is. You have amply demonstrated that.

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

The hypothesis - naturalistic abiogenesis - doesn't posit that life came to be by random chance for the reasons you just gave, your version of Hoyle's junkyard tornado assembling a 747. It's a strawman argument against a claim not made.

And nothing is random at the scale of sensory experience. Physical processes proceed predictably and inevitably whenever possible. Warm ice to it's melting point and watch the crystal melt every time. Drop a ball on the earth's surface and watch it fall until it can fall no further.

And put the ingredients necessary for life together under the proper conditions and watch it come alive. Everything that happens in a living cell fits that description. Put glucose and the enzymes of the Krebs cycle together and watch the glucose undergo glycolysis. Every time. There's nothing random there.

There's nothing random about planets being spherical, either, although I bet you'd love to make one of those statistical arguments about the odds against all of the pieces of a planet finding one another and organizing themselves into a sphere about as long as the pieces of a junkyard 747 finding one another and organizing into a jet. Nevertheless, they form EVERY TIME conditions are right for it, just like life as best we can tell. Your incredulity is irrelevant outside of your head.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

Oh so now you are just admitting that you are wrong again by repeating obviously false claims that you have not been able to support.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

Yeah, except for the fact that your basal assumptions are incredibly wrong.

Try again.

 

[Monty]

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

Why did your creator "create" humans billions of years after it "created" the universe, and millions of years after dinosaurs and other life forms went extinct, given that the universe has existed for billions of years since there are over 200 billion visible galaxies and the speed of light is ~300,000 km/sec?

 

[John53]

The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

It would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

You refute yourself, if there's odds against it happening then there's a chance it did happen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You refute yourself, if there's odds against it happening then there's a chance it did happen.

And the problem is that his figure is ridiculous. The earliest of life would have been insanely simple. First off it would have to be if it arose from natural processes. Second there was at that time no need for complexity. There was no competition. All that would have been required was a self replicating strand of RNA in an environment where there was a source of amino acids. Like one would find near black smokers.

How RNA was able to become self replicating is still not fully understood. It is one of the problems in abiogenesis. But man has formed self replicating RNA. The shortest strand of self replicating RNA was only 165 amino acids long. And a superior one was made that was only 189 amino acids long:

RNA world - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In other words we are only looking for a molecule that is on the order of 200 amino acids long, not 100,000.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You refute yourself, if there's odds against it happening then there's a chance it did happen.

First that was just the odds against that 100,000 base pair if not the millions of other atoms that must be present at the same moment in an exact arrangement. Just that would be impossible,
Then the trillions of other miracles .

 

[John53]

First that was just the odds against that 100,000 base pair if not the millions of other atoms that must be present at the same moment in an exact arrangement. Just that would be impossible,
Then the trillions of other miracles .

Like I said, you're giving it a chance so you're refuting your own claim of it being irrefutable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

First that was just the odds against that 100,000 base pair if not the millions of other atoms that must be present at the same moment in an exact arrangement. Just that would be impossible,
Then the trillions of other miracles .

More like 200 base pairs. I supplied a source. You pulled your figure out of your backside.

 

[Sargonski]

First that was just the odds against that 100,000 base pair if not the millions of other atoms that must be present at the same moment in an exact arrangement. Just that would be impossible,
Then the trillions of other miracles .

More like 200 base pairs. I supplied a source. You pulled your figure out of your backside.

Well .. that and that this is just silliness to begin with .. the atoms do not need to be present at the exact same moment .. that is not how nature works ... not how evolution works. What starts out as atoms .. bouncing around randomly ..forms something that is not so random... forms a complex structure.. say an amino acid - and these amino acids are spit out by the primordial ooze on a regular basis.

One day this molecule - which is itself a complex structure .. hooks up with another molecule forming a more complex structure.. only that molecule needed to be there at the exact moment .. note the other molecule that will later interact to form an even more complex structure = they all don't have to be there at the same time.

Told you your calculation is all wrong because your assumptions are false .... a house built on false assumptions is like a foundation built on Sand .... when waves came and the whole structure fell down with a big crash .. Thus sayeth the Lord Jesus ... rather than Lord Marty ... Salvation via Jesus rather than Lord Marty... No free pass through the pearly gates for you I am sorry to say Brother SBTL