New Evidence Found To Show Humans Came From Fish

[BioStudent]

Not to nit pick James Bond, but I wanted to point out some inaccuracies in your post...

I do not make sense to you because humans cannot create protein. That is a fact. Proteins can only be created within a cell, not outside it.

Wherever did you get that idea? These days, if you have the money, a company can make any protein sequence you specify, no cells needed! One of the many vendors offering this service can be found here

".. in the presence of oxygen, life could not evolve; without oxygen, thus no ozone, life could not evolve or exist."

Life exists in many places without oxygen. In fact, many bacterial species to this day cannot survive in the *presence* of oxygen. There is no reason to suppose bacteria could not have existed on an earth without oxygen, and in fact, plenty of evidence that bacteria existed before oxygen was produced through photosynthesis.

 

[james bond]

Not to nit pick James Bond, but I wanted to point out some inaccuracies in your post...



Wherever did you get that idea? These days, if you have the money, a company can make any protein sequence you specify, no cells needed! One of the many vendors offering this service can be found here



Life exists in many places without oxygen. In fact, many bacterial species to this day cannot survive in the *presence* of oxygen. There is no reason to suppose bacteria could not have existed on an earth without oxygen, and in fact, plenty of evidence that bacteria existed before oxygen was produced through photosynthesis.

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

What is a peptide? Is it a protein or just a string of amino acids? I got it from Duane Gish. Read my last link #154.

You misread what I said. I said if oxygen was present, then no life could form. Different from how we need oxygen to survive.

 

[BioStudent]

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

What is a peptide? Is it a protein or just a string of amino acids? I got it from Duane Gish. Read my last link #154.

A protein is a string of amino acids. "Peptide" is what you use when talking specifically about the amino acid sequence and not the 3D structure it folds into. Getting the peptide to fold into the correct structure is trickier than just making it, but it also can and has been done.

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

You misread what I said. I said if oxygen was present, then no life could form. Different from how we need oxygen to survive.

Most current models of how life formed, based on experimental data, have life forming without oxygen, and we have evidence of pre-oxygen life on Earth. Your clarification is basically denying that the sky is blue.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Interesting. Did you know the percentage of atheists in American prisons is around .07%? That's far lower than the mean. By your reasoning those prisons should be the safest place on earth...

... Argue with god to find evidence? Oh brother...

I've heard about the "percentage of atheists" in prison, which studies failed to take into account:

1. It's not a popular gig to identify as atheist to parole boards

2. A LOT of people get SAVED in PRISON

3. Etc.

And yes, instead of pursuing God here on the boards, why not pursue God? Inefficient technique now, I daresay.

 

[BilliardsBall]

They belong here as much as any monotheist who knows there is only one God and put down disagreeing religions.
Granted, nobody should be putting down anyone, but having a strong belief, either strong atheism or strong theism, doesn't mean the person won't have valuable contributions to make to the forum or won't be interested in learning other perspectives.

Agreed, but I don't put down "anyone" I put down false religion.

False religion ascribes to a god or gods usually, atheism ascribes to requiring special (omniscient) knowledge. Less tenable!

 

[BilliardsBall]

No I am pointing out you are complaining about atheists on a forum that is not exclusive. You want them to leave. You are whining.



No it isn't. I am not obligated to follow whatever terms you dictate I should follow. After all it is you demanding something of other people. I am telling you that this isn't happening.

You have no right in not being offended. Welcome to reality.

Yes, I want you leave, but I'm not whining about it. I'm offering evidence about it:

1. You show by your presence you believe in God and are in denial/having a conversion reaction.

2. You are belligerent, underscoring stereotypes about nasty atheists.

3. Shall I go on? (Not whining.)

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Agreed, but I don't put down "anyone" I put down false religion.

False religion ascribes to a god or gods usually, atheism ascribes to requiring special (omniscient) knowledge. Less tenable!

The least tenable position here is young earth creationism and a global flood but it doesn't stop the site from welcoming them.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Agreed, but I don't put down "anyone" I put down false religion.

False religion ascribes to a god or gods usually, atheism ascribes to requiring special (omniscient) knowledge. Less tenable!

Atheism doesn't speak to knowledge at all. It's a lack of belief, not a claim to knowledge.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes, I want you leave, but I'm not whining about it. I'm offering evidence about it:

1. You show by your presence you believe in God and are in denial/having a conversion reaction.

2. You are belligerent, underscoring stereotypes about nasty atheists.

3. Shall I go on? (Not whining.)

How about going off and starting your own board where you get to make your own rules and kick out whomever you please.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Atheism doesn't speak to knowledge at all. It's a lack of belief, not a claim to knowledge.

That equates to knowledge that there is no god. If you doubt whether a god exists then you are an agnostic. An atheist is convinced he knows that no gods exist.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

That equates to knowledge that there is no god. If you doubt whether a god exists then you are an agnostic. An atheist is convinced he knows that no gods exist.

I'm sure I've already linked this but just in case anyone is interested, atheism and agnostic aren't mutually exclusive terms:
Agnostic atheism - Wikipedia

 

[Reggie Miller]

I'm sure I've already linked this but just in case anyone is interested, atheism and agnostic aren't mutually exclusive terms:
Agnostic atheism - Wikipedia

So? That doesn't change my post. An atheist is a person who is convinced that no deity exists.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

So? That doesn't change my post. An atheist is a person who is convinced that no deity exists.

An atheist is a person who doesn't believe a deity exists. They do not necessarily claim to know a deity doesn't exist.
This:

That equates to knowledge that there is no god

is gnostic atheism.
This:

Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.

is agnostic atheism.

Both are atheist. I'd go as far as to say there are far more examples of the latter than the former in atheism.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That equates to knowledge that there is no god. If you doubt whether a god exists then you are an agnostic. An atheist is convinced he knows that no gods exist.

No it doesn't. Knowledge and belief are different things. Atheism is lack of belief in god. It's not the assertion that there is no god, or that we know there is no god. Anti-theists can and do assert that there is no god, but they aren't the same thing.

Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive terms either. In fact, I consider myself an agnostic atheist.

 

[SkepticThinker]

So? That doesn't change my post. An atheist is a person who is convinced that no deity exists.

No, no. They are people who aren't convinced that a deity exists.

 

[Reggie Miller]

No it doesn't. Knowledge and belief are different things. Atheism is lack of belief in god. It's not the assertion that there is no god, or that we know there is no god. Anti-theists can and do assert that there is no god, but they aren't the same thing.

Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive terms either. In fact, I consider myself an agnostic atheist.

According to Merriam Webster:

Definition of atheism

1. 1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
   
   
2. 2archaic : godlessness especially in conduct : ungodliness, wickedness
   

Definition of agnostic

1. 1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
   
   
2. 2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>
   

agnosticism
play\-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun



There are the definitions. I'm not going to argue semantics. There is clearly a difference between the two according to the dictionary and I'm not going to argue about it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

According to Merriam Webster:

Definition of atheism

1. 1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
   
   
2. 2archaic : godlessness especially in conduct : ungodliness, wickedness

Definition of agnostic

1. 1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
   
   
2. 2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

agnosticism
play\-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun



There are the definitions. I'm not going to argue semantics. There is clearly a difference between the two according to the dictionary and I'm not going to argue about it.

As I said, thanks.

See the difference between knowledge and belief?

 

[Reggie Miller]

As I said, thanks.

See the difference between knowledge and belief?

See where atheism includes both?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

According to Merriam Webster:

Definition of atheism

1. 1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
   
   
2. 2archaic : godlessness especially in conduct : ungodliness, wickedness

Definition of agnostic

1. 1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
   
   
2. 2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

agnosticism
play\-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun



There are the definitions. I'm not going to argue semantics. There is clearly a difference between the two according to the dictionary and I'm not going to argue about it.

The dictionary is not a good place to go for theological terms, just like it's not a good place to go for medical or scientific terms. Dictionary is lay usage, not theological or philosophical usage as it appears in education. The dictionary won't have other in-use terms like theological noncognitivism or ignostic, nor differentiate between implicit and explicit or weak or strong or gnostic and agnostic.

With that said I want to point out that even your dictionary differentiates between 'lack of belief' and 'strong disbelief,' and does not contain words or phrases like 'knowledge' because that would require a different term, as pointed out in the definition of agnostic.

You can have hold a position of disbelief and also the position of unknowable at the same time. There is no conflict between agnostic and atheism.

 

[Reggie Miller]

The dictionary is not a good place to go for theological terms, just like it's not a good place to go for medical or scientific terms. Dictionary is lay usage, not theological or philosophical usage as it appears in education. The dictionary won't have other in-use terms like theological noncognitivism or ignostic, nor differentiate between implicit and explicit or weak or strong or gnostic and agnostic.

With that said I want to point out that even your dictionary differentiates between 'lack of belief' and 'strong disbelief,' and does not contain words or phrases like 'knowledge' because that would require a different term, as pointed out in the definition of agnostic.

You can have hold a position of disbelief and also the position of unknowable at the same time. There is no conflict between agnostic and atheism.

Translation: I don't like what the dictionary says and prefer to go with my own definitions.

Knock yourself out.