Life From Dirt?

[YoursTrue]

Nope, you made a claim. It is up to you to support it. Please prove to use that life did not start up naturally. Why do you think that is impossible? Proper reasoning and evidence are required.

Support your theories, you can't. I'm talking about the lack of evidence for evolution. Someone here made the claim that collection of atoms think. Really? Do single atoms think? Or is it only a collection of atoms that think? Maybe bees' brains figured how to build hives, as their atoms collected. You say God is evil? Satan virtually claimed that. He didn't say it right out like you do but he sure implied it. And he ain't gonna live forever either, but it's not because of evilution. So you can't blame evilution for death, murder and mayhem because it's not a person, right?

 

[YoursTrue]

All science changes over the years. Science has a tendence to get more and more accurate. Meanwhile you believe in a book of myths that tells you that your God is evil and incompetent. It is a pity that the Bible has no method for correcting its countless errors. You act as if correcting errors is a bad thing.

Science may change. Truth does not.

 

[gnostic]

The demand for explanation is not a good excuse to verify the changing concepts of evolutionary theory. The theory itself evolves, lol.

Theories, any scientific theories, should be updated, WHENEVER THERE ARE SOME NEW EVIDENCE & DATA to verify the evidence.

This is the 21st century, not the mid to late 19th century, so of course, Natural Selection would include new evidence, because technology have been introduced to observe and test the evidence.

Take for instance, the theory of gravity started with Isaac Newton, but while his theory for certain fields (eg mechanical engineering, civil engineering, etc), it only provide approximate solutions. Then in 1915, Albert Einstein brought in general relativity, which is more accurate than Newton's original theory/solution.

Do you want today's physicists to ignore Einstein?

All scientific theories are subject to modification, as long as the evidence support & verify the changes.

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, they exist regardless of whether or not we discuss them.

. Ghosts, vampires, witches flying around on brooms, wizards like Dumbledoor. Railway platforms when you crash through pillars. Oh, you do have a colorful world straight out of Harry Potter.

 

[Subduction Zone]

More I read about lava and sediment, lava erupted is sediment. Plain, simple, and rock.

Sediment is not rock. You have not been listening. Don't you know what the word "sediment" means? If you do not understand a very simple concept but pretend that you do then you only look foolish.

You got it all wrong. You go back to condemning God when you can't verify any "theory" you talk about. Anyway, meanwhile what has the theory of evolution done for mankind? Did it stop placement of plastic in the oceans? Did it stop greed? How about death? Did the theory stop death as inevitable? Enjoy your theories. They aren't true.

Nope, you are still not reasoning rationally. That is a huge red herring. It does not matter if the theory of evolution is true or not. The God of Genesis is immoral and incompetent even if he did create an Adam and Eve. Evolution itself has nothing to do with the issues that you brought up. Why do you keep doing that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Science may change. Truth does not.

That's true. And it was obvious a long time ago that the stories in Genesis were just myths. That truth has never changed and it never will.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Support your theories, you can't. I'm talking about the lack of evidence for evolution. Someone here made the claim that collection of atoms think. Really? Do single atoms think? Or is it only a collection of atoms that think? Maybe bees' brains figured how to build hives, as their atoms collected. You say God is evil? Satan virtually claimed that. He didn't say it right out like you do but he sure implied it. And he ain't gonna live forever either, but it's not because of evilution. So you can't blame evilution for death, murder and mayhem because it's not a person, right?

No, now you are projecting and breaking the Ninth Commandment since I can support my theories. Your inability to understand that is your problem since countless people have tried to explain to you. You cannot blame others when you yourself refuse to learn.


Anyone that claims that there is a "lack of evidence for evolution" is clearly breaking the Ninth Commandment. Ask any honest scientist. They will tell you that the evidence for it is endless. But then you refuse to even understand what is and what is not evidence. You probably do not understand the Ninth Commandment either. Read it. It is not a law about not lying. Though far too often when a person lies he is also breaking the Ninth Commandment. The Ninth is a ban on "bearing false witness against your neighbor". Like it or not scientists are your neighbor. And like it or not, they have found endless evidence for the theory of evolution. So much evidence that you are claiming that your God is a liar when you say that Genesis is history. Since you are saying that scientists have not done something that they clearly have that is "bearing false witness". It does not matter if you believe your falsehoods or not, they are still false. If you know that you are wrong and still say it that would be lying. But it appears that you do not even understand the concept of evidence.

So your inability to understand what is and what is not evidence means that your statement is not a lie, but since it is still a false claim about others it is still a breaking of the Ninth Commandment. When it comes to the Commandments ignorance is not an excuse.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, now you are projecting and breaking the Ninth Commandment since I can support my theories. Your inability to understand that is your problem since countless people have tried to explain to you. You cannot blame others when you yourself refuse to learn.


Anyone that claims that there is a "lack of evidence for evolution" is clearly breaking the Ninth Commandment. Ask any honest scientist. They will tell you that the evidence for it is endless. But then you refuse to even understand what is and what is not evidence. You probably do not understand the Ninth Commandment either. Read it. It is not a law about not lying. Though far too often when a person lies he is also breaking the Ninth Commandment. The Ninth is a ban on "bearing false witness against your neighbor". Like it or not scientists are your neighbor. And like it or not, they have found endless evidence for the theory of evolution. So much evidence that you are claiming that your God is a liar when you say that Genesis is history. Since you are saying that scientists have not done something that they clearly have that is "bearing false witness". It does not matter if you believe your falsehoods or not, they are still false. If you know that you are wrong and still say it that would be lying. But it appears that you do not even understand the concept of evidence.

So your inability to understand what is and what is not evidence means that your statement is not a lie, but since it is still a false claim about others it is still a breaking of the Ninth Commandment. When it comes to the Commandments ignorance is not an excuse.

Magic supports your theories, frankly. By this time I am getting to know you and the theories you embrace.

 

[YoursTrue]

That's true. And it was obvious a long time ago that the stories in Genesis were just myths. That truth has never changed and it never will.

I'm going to say this again -- bees did not think through building beehives. Unless you have "evidence" proving otherwise. No, sorry, "showing" otherwise. Can't prove anything, right?
No wonder Jesus said if the disciples didn't talk about the kingdom of God, the stones would. Speaking to the Pharisees who condemned Jesus' disciples, he said, "and he answered “I tell you, if these are silent the stones will shout."

 

[YoursTrue]

Theories, any scientific theories, should be updated, WHENEVER THERE ARE SOME NEW EVIDENCE & DATA to verify the evidence.

This is the 21st century, not the mid to late 19th century, so of course, Natural Selection would include new evidence, because technology have been introduced to observe and test the evidence.

Take for instance, the theory of gravity started with Isaac Newton, but while his theory for certain fields (eg mechanical engineering, civil engineering, etc), it only provide approximate solutions. Then in 1915, Albert Einstein brought in general relativity, which is more accurate than Newton's original theory/solution.

Do you want today's physicists to ignore Einstein?

All scientific theories are subject to modification, as long as the evidence support & verify the changes.

Einstein is dead. He left theories behind for people to play with. Einstein doesn't know who is talking, or whether anyone else has "improved" or changed theories.

 

[YoursTrue]

All science changes over the years. Science has a tendence to get more and more accurate. Meanwhile you believe in a book of myths that tells you that your God is evil and incompetent. It is a pity that the Bible has no method for correcting its countless errors. You act as if correcting errors is a bad thing.

Speaking of accuracies, I suppose you think, theorize, and imagine that "science" will discover, theorize, imagine, figure how life started in the first place, right? I'm not going to give you any illustrations now because of what is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Magic supports your theories, frankly. By this time I am getting to know you and the theories you embrace.

No it doesn't. just because you refuse to learn a simple concept does not mean that magic is used. Ironically the Bible is a book of magic.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Speaking of accuracies, I suppose you think, theorize, and imagine that "science" will discover, theorize, imagine, figure how life started in the first place, right? I'm not going to give you any illustrations now because of what is.

What makes you think that they are pretty advanced when it comes to that problem? But for you that is a forbidden topic right now. Until you learn the basics of science there is no point in going over a much more complex concept with you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm going to say this again -- bees did not think through building beehives. Unless you have "evidence" proving otherwise. No, sorry, "showing" otherwise. Can't prove anything, right?
No wonder Jesus said if the disciples didn't talk about the kingdom of God, the stones would. Speaking to the Pharisees who condemned Jesus' disciples, he said, "and he answered “I tell you, if these are silent the stones will shout."

But stones are not silent. Once again you are displaying rather extreme ignorance. The fossil record shouts out "Evolution!!"

If you are willing to learn I am willing to try to teach you, but you need to become more honest than you have been in the past.

 

[YoursTrue]

But stones are not silent. Once again you are displaying rather extreme ignorance. The fossil record shouts out "Evolution!!"

If you are willing to learn I am willing to try to teach you, but you need to become more honest than you have been in the past.

You can't even accept that lava is sediment. Why bother with anything else? or better, why do you think you can teach me when you can't even get what sediment is. Or don't want to.

 

[We Never Know]

Theories, any scientific theories, should be updated, WHENEVER THERE ARE SOME NEW EVIDENCE & DATA to verify the evidence.

This is the 21st century, not the mid to late 19th century, so of course, Natural Selection would include new evidence, because technology have been introduced to observe and test the evidence.

Take for instance, the theory of gravity started with Isaac Newton, but while his theory for certain fields (eg mechanical engineering, civil engineering, etc), it only provide approximate solutions. Then in 1915, Albert Einstein brought in general relativity, which is more accurate than Newton's original theory/solution.

Do you want today's physicists to ignore Einstein?

All scientific theories are subject to modification, as long as the evidence support & verify the changes.

"All scientific theories are subject to modification, as long as the evidence support & verify the changes"

Right. So does this mean no theory is set in stone,, so to speak?

 

[YoursTrue]

What makes you think that they are pretty advanced when it comes to that problem? But for you that is a forbidden topic right now. Until you learn the basics of science there is no point in going over a much more complex concept with you.

I am going to tell you now that science will never figure some things out no matter how many years a scientist may try. Now because I have come to like and respect you even though our ideas are so very different, I'm once again thinking to refrain from carrying this discussion on for a while. EXCEPT to ask you what YOUR definition is of evil. You obviously don't like death but consider it bound in to the theory. which it is, and we are programmed genetically to die now. This will not always be the case. And that makes perfect sense to me. But! there again are provisions that you don't like. Anyway, have a good evening.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am going to tell you now that science will never figure some things out no matter how many years a scientist may try. Now because I have come to like and respect you even though our ideas are so very different, I'm once again thinking to refrain from carrying this discussion on for a while. EXCEPT to ask you what YOUR definition is of evil. You obviously don't like death but consider it bound in to the theory. which it is, and we are programmed genetically to die now. This will not always be the case. And that makes perfect sense to me. But! there again are provisions that you don't like. Anyway, have a good evening.

How would you know that? You only have an elementary school level of scientific literacy right now. Did you know at one point some people declared with equal or even stronger denial that man would never achieve powered flight?

But here you go:

Evil is someone doing unnecessary harm to others. So if you are defending another from a person attacking that person that is not evil. It is sometimes necessary to inflict harm on others. But a person that harms others merely because he wants to is evil.

The God of the Bible is supposedly omniscient and omnipotent, right?

 

[YoursTrue]

How would you know that? You only have an elementary school level of scientific literacy right now. Did you know at one point some people declared with equal or even stronger denial that man would never achieve powered flight?

But here you go:

Evil is someone doing unnecessary harm to others. So if you are defending another from a person attacking that person that is not evil. It is sometimes necessary to inflict harm on others. But a person that harms others merely because he wants to is evil.

The God of the Bible is supposedly omniscient and omnipotent, right?

Here we go again. OK, we know that evolution is not a person. So in your opinion, death cannot be evil. Death, according to you, is part of life which has evolved. Since evolution is not a person, it cannot impose death as a penalty, but it is inevitable. Geneticallyl we inherit death from yes, Adam & Eve, but you don't think God is fair, loving or kind to do that. You think, in fact, He is evil, but evolution is neutral, neither good nor bad because it is not a person.
Evolution cannot take away death, can it? Maybe some think it can or imagine it will someday. And that's where I get off the train. Except to say that the last enemy is death, and it will be done away with. "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." (1 Corinthians 15:26) It will take a while, but the Bible says it will happen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here we go again. OK, we know that evolution is not a person. So in your opinion, death cannot be evil. Death, according to you, is part of life which has evolved. Since evolution is not a person, it cannot impose death as a penalty, but it is inevitable. Geneticallyl we inherit death from yes, Adam & Eve, but you don't think God is fair, loving or kind to do that. You think, in fact, He is evil, but evolution is neutral, neither good nor bad because it is not a person.
Evolution cannot take away death, can it? Maybe some think it can or imagine it will someday. And that's where I get off the train. Except to say that the last enemy is death, and it will be done away with. "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." (1 Corinthians 15:26) It will take a while, but the Bible says it will happen.

Yes, in reality death cannot be evil in of itself. You still believe in an evil God. So why do you believe in an incompetent, lying evil God?