Proof of Creationism made by NASA

[gnostic]

Abiogenesis, like original Creation, are unprovable assertions. We have to be cautious as to how we interpret scientific data.

You can only have “scientific data” if you have verifiable “physical evidence”.

Science deal with evidence, and evidence are the only way to test a theory or a hypothesis.

Scientists don’t “prove” or “disprove” a theory or hypothesis, they “test” it.

As to Abiogenesis, it is a working hypothesis. There have already been evidence and experiments that organic matters (biological molecules or compounds) can chemically formed from inorganic chemicals.

 

[rational experiences]

My brother born a baby to our origin loving spiritual human parents is a liar. Notice human beings first are spiritual in nature. Memory says so as biology.

Baby man self idolator.

As he thought all terms of human science as that man history from a baby to adult thinker. His brothers agreed.

They lived as a hierarchical takeover of nature's human family life support natural as men. All ceremony in nature with family no other group.

Gave their brother title a king. They were lords. Evil men. Lived the spiritual human position first. Yet were of two minds. Is our teaching.

They invented technology man's science on earth as just humans.

So when civilisation technology was destroyed he knew he mutated new nature after ice age. No longer was history of life on earth dinosaurs.

Our brother aware was aware of his choices science causes too.

Became an archaeologist to dig up evidence of his science destruction. Found machine parts held frozen in instant snap freeze fused.

Became a studier of nature who said look modern birds are mutated. They should not be mutated. Life changed from dinosaurs into a non mutated new living small warm blooded one species of anything.

Highest type natural first.

I hence chose behaviour activities as men to prove why my science is evil.

By my practices. And he did.

So his own awareness is now about science plus natural life. Who said I want to resource my owned science technology. Science is human practice only.

As science is just my designs I own and control. Natural is not in my control.

So you review conscious thought. Why would a human scientist believe a thesis I can control earth by my button pushing.

Relating ideas to images. Images holographic a thesis then emerging into a biology?

As he makes movies. In pretend he has cities ours plunging into opened earth mass. Or falling destroyed in huge disasters. In image pretend land.

Terms in his psyche memory I'm controlling natural disasters in images. Button pusher machine scientist in many various choices...one mind however.

My thesis hence is fake.

His brother said an image of life only exists as image as it exists cooled. From image to biology is existing said only in a thought review.... life is by sex. Microbes life mine from sperm ovary a human is existing.

Data of human science as correct use of human only data.

By all of those Scientific terms.

Never did a real human theist scientist say image changed into biology as it didn't. End is position natural highest greatest only.

However if humans do pretence pretend. Claiming earths rock god substance is the same type historic as biology. In pretend image thesis he told a fake story as a human how he believed Rock changed to be biology.

And it is just pretend. Where he confessed I made that story up by my images pretending in my human head. Storytelling uses psychic imagery.

Is the brother in science the theist destroyer of all things including his own science position.

Data correct in human science says bible story is fake. Dangerous to reference in fact. As in data human science biology their lives are now skeletal dusts blowing on the wind.

Why science says the bible is not human scientific advice. Now present...gift of life is present only. Data of biology is exact as science owns many branches.

So if you abuse the wisdom of another branch in the tree knowledge you are an evil scientist.

So then you ask and who idolised humans biological sacrifice? I didn't.

 

[rational experiences]

Can you hold breath for eternity?

This quote said proof they are experimenting in life .......as when I got burnt attacked I was losing oxygen. So I was holding my breath. No other reason why you'd say it unless you were watching it happen.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If so, it is evidence for God. How can monkey-brain be mystical? I am best only for some group of people, and only in some areas of mathematics and physics. Glory to my Creator Jesus Christ.

It wasn't a compliment.

But you know that, off course.
If you don't, you're not as smart as you claim to be.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You can only have “scientific data” if you have verifiable “physical evidence”.

Science deal with evidence, and evidence are the only way to test a theory or a hypothesis.

Scientists don’t “prove” or “disprove” a theory or hypothesis, they “test” it.

As to Abiogenesis, it is a working hypothesis. There have already been evidence and experiments that organic matters (biological molecules or compounds) can chemically formed from inorganic chemicals.

Molecules and compounds are not life--the simplest life is more complex than say, New York City, with all of its people, animals, structures, communications, etc.

 

[gnostic]

Molecules and compounds are not life--the simplest life is more complex than say, New York City, with all of its people, animals, structures, communications, etc.

What you are saying about New York and simplest life, is irrelevant and exaggerated example.

So I think it is a bloody waste of time, commenting on that part of you reply.

As to your, “Molecules and compounds are not life”, clearly you don’t understand that everything in each cell, are made of biological molecules and compounds, amino acids, all the different types of proteins, nucleic acids (RNA, DNA), different types of carbohydrates, different types of lipids, etc, are all biological molecules or compounds.

The 3 most essential biological macromolecules are:

1. Proteins
2. Nucleic acids
3. Carbohydrates

Abiogenesis is about understanding how these biological matters exist before the formation of the earliest cells.

All of these are required in living cells...and without them, there would no cells...and without cells there would be no life whatsoever.

So, if you want to ignorantly ignore these essential molecules/compounds, then, please, be my guest.

You can believe what you want to believe, but your belief would be wrong to ignore the origin of organic matters.

 

[rational experiences]

Creationist human theists science society versus natural highest dominion life owner one species the human.

To be a human you are your healthiest highest genetic type. Should be beautiful healthy conscious and perfect of healer aware spiritual behaviour. Conscious human.

The human in observation our nature.

Then evil minded Theists b s. Old group cult behaviour ego.

The bible isn't real.

It doesn't state old life was first dinosaurs who lived in the nature earth garden. Owned thick skin cold blood in a humid one climate no ice no saviour does it?

No.

Theist thinks about a living not destroyed dinosaur don't you?

Yes.

Lying.

Dinosaurs destroyed.

Ice exists saviour. Asteroid that hit earth killed dinosaur was passing by. Saviour too.

Highest human advice exact.

Yes.

Then you theoried technology about dusts converting? Yes.

Why,?

Star that didn't pass hits earth man brain changes his ideas.

Not any UFO.

You knew ice had covered the whole earth. So mountain tips ∆ were frozen kept cooled?

Yes.

You built temple science where? On mountain tops transmitted through cloud cooling.

Where is that equals advice on ground as pyramid?

It isn't.

Is that advice science?

No it's natural biology observation stories.. science a practice is only changing dusts and didn't own it.

Where do you get science? Natural observation or law?

Neither.

Calculus that lies as the formula is not using natural law.

Big liars science is as a human first of no human name as one. Species one name of all one is the human only...one. two of in every one species observed only.

Looked back at a healthy bird species. Should have said the bird hence should not be mutated. Something happened in the past to cause it.

That answer your science had.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What you are saying about New York and simplest life, is irrelevant and exaggerated example.

So I think it is a bloody waste of time, commenting on that part of you reply.

As to your, “Molecules and compounds are not life”, clearly you don’t understand that everything in each cell, are made of biological molecules and compounds, amino acids, all the different types of proteins, nucleic acids (RNA, DNA), different types of carbohydrates, different types of lipids, etc, are all biological molecules or compounds.

The 3 most essential biological macromolecules are:

1. Proteins
2. Nucleic acids
3. Carbohydrates

Abiogenesis is about understanding how these biological matters exist before the formation of the earliest cells.

All of these are required in living cells...and without them, there would no cells...and without cells there would be no life whatsoever.

So, if you want to ignorantly ignore these essential molecules/compounds, then, please, be my guest.

You can believe what you want to believe, but your belief would be wrong to ignore the origin of organic matters.

Yes, life isn't that complicated. That's why scientists have created life from simple proteins, nucleic acids and carbohydrates, just as you've suggested. Plus, all biologists, chemists and evolutionists agree on how exactly life arrived without Creation--how abiogenesis worked, and they've duplicated abiogenesis in the laboratory.

 

[gnostic]

Yes, life isn't that complicated. That's why scientists have created life from simple proteins, nucleic acids and carbohydrates, just as you've suggested.

I didn’t say they created life.

I only these macromolecules that are essential building blocks for cells, can be produced through experiments...but they can also occur naturally.

Being able to produce these biological compounds, like proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, or any other organic matters, would be small steps in the right direction for Abiogenesis.

Beside that, both inorganic compounds and organic compounds have been found in meteorites, eg the Murchison Meteorite (1969). This tell us not only certain biological compounds can be recreated in the lab, they also tell us that these organic matters can occur “naturally” outside the labs.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Molecules and compounds are not life--the simplest life is more complex than say, New York City, with all of its people, animals, structures, communications, etc.

Molecules and compounds aren't life. They are what "life" is composed of.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I didn’t say they created life.

I only these macromolecules that are essential building blocks for cells, can be produced through experiments...but they can also occur naturally.

Being able to produce these biological compounds, like proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, or any other organic matters, would be small steps in the right direction for Abiogenesis.

Beside that, both inorganic compounds and organic compounds have been found in meteorites, eg the Murchison Meteorite (1969). This tell us not only certain biological compounds can be recreated in the lab, they also tell us that these organic matters can occur “naturally” outside the labs.

These steps, which I acknowledge, would be tiny, minute steps toward life--that reproduces life--from nothing.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Molecules and compounds aren't life. They are what "life" is composed of.

The molecular and compound work done to date is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction towards what is needed for abiogenesis and sustainable life.

 

[gnostic]

These steps, which I acknowledge, would be tiny, minute steps toward life--that reproduces life--from nothing.

Except that these organic matters are not “nothing”.

Without these functioning molecules in each cells, there wouldn’t be cells, and therefore there can be no life without these essential components in the cells.

Without proteins, lipids and carbohydrates, there would be no metabolism, and therefore no life. There would also be no reproduction.

And without nucleic acids, there would be no genetics, and without genetics, physical traits won’t be passed from parent(s) to offspring.

Life cannot come from nothing.

And cells and all the biological components that make up cells (eg, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, proteins (including what make up proteins - amino acids), lipids), are what make life possible, whether that life be unicellular organisms (species of Bacteria & species of archaea) or multicellular organisms (eg species of fungi, of plants, of animals, etc).

Cells cannot function without these essential compounds and molecules.

Why do you insist that biological macromolecules are nothing?

Have you no idea these organic compounds or molecules are so vital for life to exist?

 

[SkepticThinker]

The molecular and compound work done to date is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction towards what is needed for abiogenesis and sustainable life.

Molecules and compounds are definitely something, rather than "nothing."

 

[gnostic]

The molecular and compound work done to date is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction towards what is needed for abiogenesis and sustainable life.

In a human body, we are made of cells. And of the total mass of human body, the organic matters are comprised of: proteins 20%, lipids 12%, RNA 1%, DNA 0.1, with the rest of other organic matters making up 0.4% of the mass.

Which leaves 66.5% being inorganic, with 65% being water.

Despite the 65% being water, water isn’t organic, but they are vital for cells to function.

What do you think all the muscles, organs, glands, tissues, etc, are made of? They are mostly made of proteins.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Except that these organic matters are not “nothing”.

Without these functioning molecules in each cells, there wouldn’t be cells, and therefore there can be no life without these essential components in the cells.

Without proteins, lipids and carbohydrates, there would be no metabolism, and therefore no life. There would also be no reproduction.

And without nucleic acids, there would be no genetics, and without genetics, physical traits won’t be passed from parent(s) to offspring.

Life cannot come from nothing.

And cells and all the biological components that make up cells (eg, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, proteins (including what make up proteins - amino acids), lipids), are what make life possible, whether that life be unicellular organisms (species of Bacteria & species of archaea) or multicellular organisms (eg species of fungi, of plants, of animals, etc).

Cells cannot function without these essential compounds and molecules.

Why do you insist that biological macromolecules are nothing?

Have you no idea these organic compounds or molecules are so vital for life to exist?

I should not have used the word "nothing". But comparing the basic compounds to life is like comparing a hammer and some nails to a fully completed skyscraper--or to be more precise, a fully completed city.

 

[BilliardsBall]

In a human body, we are made of cells. And of the total mass of human body, the organic matters are comprised of: proteins 20%, lipids 12%, RNA 1%, DNA 0.1, with the rest of other organic matters making up 0.4% of the mass.

Which leaves 66.5% being inorganic, with 65% being water.

Despite the 65% being water, water isn’t organic, but they are vital for cells to function.

What do you think all the muscles, organs, glands, tissues, etc, are made of? They are mostly made of proteins.

Yes, except skeptics refuse to acknowledge the proteins of life that tell other proteins to make proteins or the "simple DNA" that connects to itself in three-dimensional space! The concept of some simple compounds and basic proteins stirring about to form simple life goes against most logic and rules of order, science and entropy.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Molecules and compounds are definitely something, rather than "nothing."

Yes, they exist. But comparing these basic items to the simplest life form is comparing your hammer and nails to downtown Manhattan.

 

[gnostic]

I should not have used the word "nothing". But comparing the basic compounds to life is like comparing a hammer and some nails to a fully completed skyscraper--or to be more precise, a fully completed city.

Yes, except skeptics refuse to acknowledge the proteins of life that tell other proteins to make proteins or the "simple DNA" that connects to itself in three-dimensional space! The concept of some simple compounds and basic proteins stirring about to form simple life goes against most logic and rules of order, science and entropy.

You are still missing important points in my posts.

All living organisms are made of CELLS.

That's what make life possible from unicellular organisms to multicellular organisms.

Each CELL:

• it doesn’t matter if the cell is prokaryotic type of cell found only in species of the Bacteria domain or in species of the Archaea domain,
  
• or the eukaryotic type of cell found among the Eukaryota domain, (eukaryotes include all multicellular organisms like that of the Animalia kingdom, Plantae kingdom, Fungi kingdom, and the Protista kingdom.

...each cell, include these 4 essential biological compounds.

These compounds (eg proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates and lipids), exist in every cells.

I am not saying that protein “by itself” is life, or that DNA “by itself” is life. What I am saying is that even if one of these compounds is missing, there can be no life.

These cells needs these compounds, for life to exist. Understanding what these each of compounds do.

And btw, there are no such thing as "basic protein", because in human biology, there are numbers of different types of proteins that make up tissues, muscles, organs, glands, bone cells, blood cells, are made of different types of proteins, and that's dependent on how the amino acids are sequenced.

And there are 20 types of amino acids that naturally exist, that make up any number of different types of proteins.

You keep talking of "simple protein" or "basic protein", but the physical and biological realities, there are no such things as "simple" or "basic".

Seriously, you really should read up at least basic biology, about what cell are made of.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You are still missing important points in my posts.

All living organisms are made of CELLS.

That's what make life possible from unicellular organisms to multicellular organisms.

Each CELL:

• it doesn’t matter if the cell is prokaryotic type of cell found only in species of the Bacteria domain or in species of the Archaea domain,
  
• or the eukaryotic type of cell found among the Eukaryota domain, (eukaryotes include all multicellular organisms like that of the Animalia kingdom, Plantae kingdom, Fungi kingdom, and the Protista kingdom.

...each cell, include these 4 essential biological compounds.

These compounds (eg proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates and lipids), exist in every cells.

I am not saying that protein “by itself” is life, or that DNA “by itself” is life. What I am saying is that even if one of these compounds is missing, there can be no life.

These cells needs these compounds, for life to exist. Understanding what these each of compounds do.

And btw, there are no such thing as "basic protein", because in human biology, there are numbers of different types of proteins that make up tissues, muscles, organs, glands, bone cells, blood cells, are made of different types of proteins, and that's dependent on how the amino acids are sequenced.

And there are 20 types of amino acids that naturally exist, that make up any number of different types of proteins.

You keep talking of "simple protein" or "basic protein", but the physical and biological realities, there are no such things as "simple" or "basic".

Seriously, you really should read up at least basic biology, about what cell are made of.

Two issues. First, organic life shares similarities, which implies similar functions that all work in our environment--this could imply good evolution and/or a good designer.

Second, you are making my point for me--even the simplest proteins are complex and speak against abiogenesis--consider even the number of proteins that in combination produce blood clotting and help us to not die of "basic" wounds!