Proof of evolution -at last-

[F1fan]

My friend. I fear you are the one whom either lacks understanding or is feigning such, or perhaps senility is setting in. If you need to, you are welcome to re-read my previous posts from days past to understand the simple inference I was attempting to present you.

You are a big boy here in this forum and you don't need me to repeat myself as though I'm your parent. Pull-Up© your Depends™ and take your pants off your head, so you can put your thinkin' cap on.

We're so proud of you! You're trying so hard! Perhaps if you activate some "Accessibility" options on your phone or computer it will assist you in managing what you're doing. If you're uncertain how perhaps you have grand-children you can ask? I know these contraptions can be so bewildering! Oh, fiddlesticks!

What, are you 12?

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

What, are you 12?

"When in Rome, act as the Romans do."

My point was mockery

I was making another joke. You didn't understand this?

You are a big boy here in this forum and you made a claim and argument based on a guess. That is a weak claim and argument.

I thought we were mocking at and joking with one another? I was just Joshin' ya, bruhv. Yankin' yer chain. Reciprocating the intentions. Fanning your fanny.

 

[ppp]

I did answer my qualifications

I don't believe you.

 

[F1fan]

"When in Rome, act as the Romans do.

I thought we were mocking at and joking with one another? I was just Joshin' ya, bruhv. Yankin' yer chain. Reciprocating the intentions. Fanning your fanny.

So, you're a Catholic priest.

 

[F1fan]

I don't believe you.

I think he is revealing his qualifications quite clearly with his demonstration of exceptionally poor understanding of any science. I'm not sure I've seen him post anything correctly in regards to science.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

So, you're a Catholic priest.

No. I'm the altar boy. 12, remember? Are you a priest of catholicism?

12/m/wherever you need me to be

a/s/l

Lol. We gots jokes, if jokes is what you want.



Edit: AWW... I shoulda said "12/m/confessional booth" I missed it as the original.

 

[gnostic]

Okay, I thought so. I was trying to find text on the different examples of how it came about. You answered for me here, extraterrestrial and terrestrial. So, a rock with the rights bits and pieces landed here, or the bits and pieces were here and just needed the time... Or stars colliding or exploding sprayed us with the right bits and pieces.

According to what I read, there are also ⁴lipids that are fundamental or essential to life:

"Life functions through the specialized chemistry of carbon and water, and builds largely upon four key families of chemicals: lipids (cell membranes), carbohydrates (sugars, cellulose), amino acids (protein metabolism), and nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). Any successful theory of abiogenesis must explain the origins and interactions of these classes of molecules."

Source: Abiogenesis - Wikipedia

True. Lipids make up 12% of composition of adult human body.

Again, true, water do play vital roles in life, but water alone - H2O molecule - isn’t organic. Water make up 60-65% of adult human body, and one of its role, is hydrating the body parts, as well as regulating body temperature.

And the carbohydrates aren’t just sugar and cellulose; there are other roles for other types of sugars, examples ribose sugars in RNA, and deoxyribose sugars in DNA, are important components in the respective nucleic acids.

But the largest organic matters in human body are proteins, if I remember correctly about 20%,

Just remember proteins are “organic” matters, while water are not....but I am not dismissing the needs of life for water.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

but I am not dismissing the needs of life for water.

At least lifeforms we've observed so far. I'm still hoping Europa blows us away with a discovery.

 

[Valjean]

Why isn’t a persons life and testimony evidence? You may not have been there but my family, friends and those who witnessed the drastic change were sure it was supernatural and not from some kind of wishful thinking or will power.

Because religious belief was an effective psychotherapeutic modality, for you, does not mean its doctrine or scientific assertions are objectively true.
The research and testing done by science are on a whole different order than what you seem to think constitutes evidence or testing, and they have nothing to do with feelings or therapy.

Supernatural? Belief is not evidence, and belief in magic is usually just intellectual laziness.

Did your friends who witnessed these drastic changes consider any other possible explanations? Were they/you aware that other religions and therapeutic modalities produce the same results? Were they aware of the psychological and neurological research on ecstatic states? Neurology of ecstatic religious and similar experiences: Ecstatic, orgasmic, and musicogenic seizures. Stendhal syndrome and autoscopic phenomena - PubMed

When I go to baptisms and hear how God has changed people, then watch them afterwards, it’s so obvious that God is working in their lives, their whole countenance, language and character changes.

If that qualifies as obvious to you, you have serious problems with critical thinking.


Such transformations happen all the time, induced by multiple different modalities. Jumping to the conclusion that it's a magical, God-induced metamorphosis is not a reasonable conclusion, it doesn't follow. It's not evidence of the phenomenon you attribute it to.
False dilemma - Wikipedia
What Is the Logical Fallacy Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc?

 

[shunyadragon]

I asked what happened to the verifiable evidence? You have the scientists who create a scenario, they say they get the building blocks of life from non living materials. Well if this is so then what they created should’ve sustained itself, continued to grow and we should have that life right now from that very experiment. Do we? No it wasn’t sustained, a failure.

First, you have made no effort to understand the evidence supporting 'sciences behind abiogenesis and evolution.' No references nor history education from your part to resolve the questions you express above. All you have offered is assertions of belief against science.

Nothing has happened to the objective evidence. It is still there studied by the scientists, and evidence is discovered and revealed in research all the time. There are vaste numbers of publications world wide in many universities concerning the continued discoveries, and research into I google subscribe to abiogenesis research and receive notices of at least five or more journal articles a week. I would cite these here, but it is very unlikely that you would remotely ubderstand them nor read them.

 

[Valjean]

Seems you only cite part of what I said, it doesn’t take faith for me that God is real and Jesus is alive because He did something for me and gave me His Spirit. What takes faith is what He said about what I will receive that I haven’t yet. That He will do what He promised. I have faith (trust) that He will do all that He said based on what He has done already for me.

You're presupposing God's reality as part of your argument for him. You're arguing in circles.
Logical Fallacies: Begging the Question

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

You're presupposing God's reality as part of your argument for him. You're arguing in circles.
Logical Fallacies: Begging the Question

Interesting, I never put thought to the full meaning of that phrase. I always thought of the Non-Fallacy section of that link you shared when I hear that phrase, "This begs the question:"

 

[Valjean]

Clearly the spiritual realm has evaded you as well as science. Would you say there is no spiritual realm because science cannot test it?

I believe what there is evidence of.

Would you say there are no leprechauns because science hasn't discovered them? Would you say there were no herds of six-leggèd, flying hippopotamusses roaming the far side of the moon? Science has not tested this, after all. Should I assume you believe in them?

Look, there are two approaches:
1. Believe EVERYTHING, then eliminate items and beliefs when proved wrong or non-existent.
Or
2. Believe things when you have credible evidence they exist.
The first is clearly both untenable and absurd.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

The first is clearly both untenable and absurd.

and mentally exhausting.*

Edit: My position is to give any idea I hadn't heard before credence until I look into it. But, reserve a sprinkling of skepticism for everything.

 

[rational experiences]

Do you realise humans self idolisation about human thoughts thesis was a human warning. Idolising your consciousness.

The ego.

I look I see I advise life changed its biology on earth. Said a human.

A huge ancient atmospheric and ground reaction owning the ice age caused then suddenly life changed.

Congratulations on your observations.

Is about the story said by humans life changed.

Then if a human says I must understand the intricacies just remember a huge cause of death on earth changed life.

Why humans said don't thesis about nothing and don't thesis about dead life.

As a warning to consciousness possessed with its owned destruction.

Future nuclear threat nuclear decimation as ordained by scientific hu man's our destroyers. Now inherited.

 

[Valjean]

The claims are supported, I’m alive to tell about what happened. I’m not the only one, God has been active throughout history and recorded in the Scriptures, He is doing today what He has always done, making Himself known to all who call in Him in Truth. He is daily doing this all around the world.

So he makes himself known to those who already believe?
Well that's a convenient apology. It's also, as usual, circular.

I asked you a question about abiogenesis and evolution because the claim was made as fact when it’s not a fact at all that life happened all by itself apart from the Creator, evolution or changes do happen within species but to make the jump that an ape became a human being or after abiogenesis, evolution took over and this life form they happened is how we got what we see now is false.

So, if not by natural mechanisms, how might life have appeared and diversified?
Goddidit is not an explanation, it's just an assertion of agency. It explains nothing and confers no understanding. It's a cop-out.
So what mechanism do you think might account for it, if not chemical evolution and evolution?

My reasoning is with the Miller experiment, that life form that was supposedly created, where is it now, what has become of it.

You really have no knowledge of the subject your so opinionated about, do you?
The experiment produced no life forms. It produced amino-acids.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

Do you realise humans self idolisation about human thoughts thesis was a human warning. Idolising your consciousness.

The ego.

I look I see I advise life changed its biology on earth. Said a human.

A huge ancient atmospheric and ground reaction owning the ice age caused then suddenly life changed.

Congratulations on your observations.

Is about the story said by humans life changed.

Then if a human says I must understand the intricacies just remember a huge cause of death on earth changed life.

Why humans said don't thesis about nothing and don't thesis about dead life.

As a warning to consciousness possessed with its owned destruction.

Future nuclear threat nuclear decimation as ordained by scientific hu man's our destroyers. Now inherited.

Yea. If Abiogenesis is fact... I would conjecture it posits the plausibility of a rock smacking the Earth and wiping out 100% life. As long as it redeposited, or didn't completely destroy the soup of amino acids, nucleic acids, carbohydrates and lipids + agua and time life has a chance to return.
Likewise, if humans destroy themselves, but manage to leave the aforementioned ingredients out of their self-annihilation, life has the potential to return.

I'd rather we learn to communicate and work together in mutually beneficial mannerisms. Que sera, sera.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

Honest question:

Is biogenesis considered synonymous to creationism?

The wiki on it leads one to the Spontaneous Generation wiki, which says the proponents of it believe 'fleas can arise from dust and maggots from dead meat' without genetic progenitors. However, it's a very long read which I do not intend on indulging, but it doesn't seem to reference creationism, hence the inquiry above.

 

[rational experiences]

Yea. If Abiogenesis is fact... I would conjecture it posits the plausibility of a rock smacking the Earth and wiping out 100% life. As long as it redeposited, or didn't completely destroy the soup of amino acids, nucleic acids, carbohydrates and lipids + agua and time life has a chance to return.
Likewise, if humans destroy themselves, but manage to leave the aforementioned ingredients out of their self-annihilation, life has the potential to return.

I'd rather we learn to communicate and work together in mutually beneficial mannerisms. Que sera, sera.

The situation is I believe I am the God self is by my man human theisms.

Man talking human as men three self ideas yet every thought is only ever one human.

I knew a huge nuclear ground atmospheric attack changed earths biology. Says science. I will name the status evolution of the species

I thesis about releasing the attack myself as life's nuclear decimation.

By thesis with machines reactions in the atmosphere I cause to change now myself as I can copy evolution he false theories.... By want of its change. Exact I know I'm trying to achieve evolution of earths species myself

Says exactly what he believes it's AI he says causes. Forgetting that giant animals lived on earth owned naturally a life with god earth in the nature garden.

Possessed self evident is self possession as the worst type of possession.

If my machine can't achieve by theism ...
then my button pushing nuclear world bombing will. Realised already by mens mind actually Ai possessed by behaviours of co joined brothers national reasoning.

As it's a total summation of a national man's consciouness agreed by AI statements.

I am the creator of it all by my ownership human a man by men agreement theist inventor. Known consciously by how it's thought and planned.

My claim I will cause an earths artificial evolution myself copying.

Is a confess of Sion.

Confession a ritual afterwards.

Men living the choice to knowingly cause it but claiming they won't choose it as we must remain the same type of human sacrificed life.

Is a sickness of the human mind.

As they believe they won't cause it as it's not yet occurred. And science was after all every pre existing status that had occurred before as advice. Man didn't just suddenly own just a human idea.

I was asked by my husband a moment ago where was I born. I hadn't even thought about its theme...nails worth.

Maybe I am a living message to humans for humans as just a human.

 

[rational experiences]

Another ie ovah ovary example.

If a baby is genetic changed born today how long will it live in a future by age?

As already change to genesis might be active.

Just because you theory age life's 100 year span doesn't mean new life will get to live it is a warning.