Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[SavedByTheLord]

"Official answer"? Sorry, but science is not a dogma. There are no official answers. And do you know what moving the goalposts is? Here is a freebie. The theory of evolution does not depend upon natural abiogenesis. If you cannot understand evolution there is absolutely no way that you can understand abiogenesis. So I will not answer abiogenesis questions unless you admit that evolution is a fact.

Thanks. You wrote "There are no official answers."
I know they have to run and hide from abiogenesis.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks. You wrote "There are no official answers."
I know they have to run and hide from abiogenesis.

No, I am not running and hiding. I offered to answer your questions, but you need to demonstrate a minimal amount of honesty. The thread has nothing to do with abiogenesis. You are trying to change the topic. And if you want to do so there is a price to be paid.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

No, I am not running and hiding. I offered to answer your questions, but you need to demonstrate a minimal amount of honesty. The thread has nothing to do with abiogenesis. You are trying to change the topic. And if you want to do so there is a price to be paid.

There is a bunch of questions in the OP about abiogenesis.

What was the first living thing made of? Was it DNA? Was it RNA? Was it just proteins? Was it some mix?

What was its code? How many amino acids did it have? When did it come into being?

How many kinds of proteins did it have? How many of each?

Where did it come into being? In space? In the atmosphere? In the ocean? In a tide pool?

In clay or mud? What protected it from UV rays? What was the composition of the atmosphere at that time?

If it was in water, how did the amino acids keep from being dissipated by the water?

What was the energy source for these reactions?

Where there any enzymes in it? Which ones? Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts. If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years. Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years.

How did it survive? Where did the protective layer come from? What was the protected layer? How did that part get reproduced?

How was it able to divide itself? The protective layer must also divide and then close.

What was its food source? How did it remove waste? How did it repair itself? How did these things move in and out of the protective layer since they must be gated.

Please explain how it was ever able to reproduce itself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is a bunch of questions in the OP about abiogenesis.

What was the first living thing made of? Was it DNA? Was it RNA? Was it just proteins? Was it some mix?

What was its code? How many amino acids did it have? When did it come into being?

How many kinds of proteins did it have? How many of each?

Where did it come into being? In space? In the atmosphere? In the ocean? In a tide pool?

In clay or mud? What protected it from UV rays? What was the composition of the atmosphere at that time?

If it was in water, how did the amino acids keep from being dissipated by the water?

What was the energy source for these reactions?

Where there any enzymes in it? Which ones? Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts. If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years. Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years.

How did it survive? Where did the protective layer come from? What was the protected layer? How did that part get reproduced?

How was it able to divide itself? The protective layer must also divide and then close.

What was its food source? How did it remove waste? How did it repair itself? How did these things move in and out of the protective layer since they must be gated.

Please explain how it was ever able to reproduce itself.

Sorry, until you admit that evolution is a fact I will not be answering your abiogenesis questions. You do not get to change the topic even if it is your thread.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Sorry, until you admit that evolution is a fact I will not be answering your abiogenesis questions. You do not get to change the topic even if it is your thread.

Evolution is false and abiogenesis never happened.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolution is false and abiogenesis never happened.

Really? Too bad that you cannot seem to find any evidence that supports that claim.

You really should try to learn what is and what is not evidence.

 

[rocala]

@Subduction Zone, I have read with horror and occasional amusement the seemingly endless stream of nonsense from flat-earthers, creationists, and other assorted enemies of logical thought. Your persistent stand against them and the knowledge that you show, alongside your ability to express it, leaves me in total admiration.

I think RF should create a medal for people like youself.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

@Subduction Zone, I have read with horror and occasional amusement the seemingly endless stream of nonsense from flat-earthers, creationists, and other assorted enemies of logical thought. Your persistent stand against them and the knowledge that you show, alongside your ability to express it, leaves me in total admiration.

I think RF should create a medal for people like youself.

I second this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@Subduction Zone, I have read with horror and occasional amusement the seemingly endless stream of nonsense from flat-earthers, creationists, and other assorted enemies of logical thought. Your persistent stand against them and the knowledge that you show, alongside your ability to express it, leaves me in total admiration.

I think RF should create a medal for people like youself.

I second this.

Thanks so much, but now I have to buy a new hat. My head has swollen.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Really? Too bad that you cannot seem to find any evidence that supports that claim.

You really should try to learn what is and what is not evidence.

I know what it is.
what was the first living creature?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know what it is.
what was the first living creature?

Sorry, you do not get to start a post with a falsehood and then ask an irrelevant question. First off it is very very clear that you do not understand the concept of evidence. Second the topic is evolution and you keep trying to change it to abiogenesis. It appears that you have no clue what you are even arguing about.

You know the rules for answers about abiogenesis. If you insist on changing the topic you have to own up to the fact of evolution first.

 

[YoursTrue]

"Official answer"? Sorry, but science is not a dogma. There are no official answers. And do you know what moving the goalposts is? Here is a freebie. The theory of evolution does not depend upon natural abiogenesis. If you cannot understand evolution there is absolutely no way that you can understand abiogenesis. So I will not answer abiogenesis questions unless you admit that evolution is a fact.

The theory of the beginnings of the process of evolution most certaiinly and absolutely depends upon whatever theory of abiogenesis is considered. There's no way out, perhaps you want to philosophize possibilities.

 

[YoursTrue]

I know what it is.
what was the first living creature?

I look forward to that answer by believers in the theory of evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The theory of the beginnings of the process of evolution most certaiinly and absolutely depends upon whatever theory of abiogenesis is considered. There's no way out, perhaps you want to philosophize possibilities.

You of all people should know better since this has been explained to you many many times. But let me try again.

Yes, abiogenesis is the most likely origin of life. But evolution does not depend upon it. God could have magically poofed the first cell into existence. Some Christians believe this. What I find strange is that you believe that he could magically poof Adam into existing, but a far simpler poofing appears to be impossible according to you. Aliens could have put the first life on Earth though that just kicks the problem further down the line where the answer is either poofing or abiogenesis of some sort. But still that would be life beginning on Earth without abiogenesis here.

Do you understand now?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I look forward to that answer by believers in the theory of evolution.

Why? Are you too admitting that evolution is a fact. You appear to be doing so. Moving the goalposts is a form of lying and you would not lie now, would you?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You of all people should know better since this has been explained to you many many times. But let me try again.

Yes, abiogenesis is the most likely origin of life. But evolution does not depend upon it. God could have magically poofed the first cell into existence. Some Christians believe this. What I find strange is that you believe that he could magically poof Adam into existing, but a far simpler poofing appears to be impossible according to you. Aliens could have put the first life on Earth though that just kicks the problem further down the line where the answer is either poofing or abiogenesis of some sort. But still that would be life beginning on Earth without abiogenesis here.

Do you understand now?

So you have the no God assumption, but since abiogenesis is impossible you call upon Him for that miracle.
That is just inconsistent.
Abiogenesis is impossible without God, but you claim it must have happened because it had to have happened because there are living things. That is just circular reasoning.
What was the first living creature? the first offspring? the second descendant? ... the 100th descendant?
All 101 of these creatures are impossible without God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you have the no God assumption, but since abiogenesis is impossible you call upon Him for that miracle.
That is just inconsistent.

What? No there is not a "no God assumption". That is your flawed interpretation. There is no evidence for a God. Not believing in God is not a "no God assumption" either. You do not seem to understand what atheism is, nor what an assumption is. Very few atheists assume that there is no God. They simply lack a belief in a God because there is no reliable evidence for one.

Nor have you shown that abiogenesis is impossible. The opposite appears to be true. Where did you get the crazy idea that abiogenesis is impossible from? You used a strawman argument. Do you need your strawman pointed out to you?

Abiogenesis is impossible without God, but you claim it must have happened because it had to have happened because there are living things. That is just circular reasoning.

Prove it. You just made a positive assertion. That puts the burden of proof upon you. No strawman arguments allowed. And no, I claim that it appears to be the most likely source. There is quite a bit of evidence for it, but you need to learn what is and what is not evidence first.

What was the first living creature? the first offspring? the second descendant? ... the 100th descendant?
All 101 of these creatures are impossible without God.

Once again prove it. You just claiming that does not make it true.

Your argument has been refuted as you formed it. Your inability to understand your failure does not mean that you succeeded.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

What? No there is not a "no God assumption". That is your flawed interpretation. There is no evidence for a God. Not believing in God is not a "no God assumption" either. You do not seem to understand what atheism is, nor what an assumption is. Very few atheists assume that there is no God. They simply lack a belief in a God because there is no reliable evidence for one.

Nor have you shown that abiogenesis is impossible. The opposite appears to be true. Where did you get the crazy idea that abiogenesis is impossible from? You used a strawman argument. Do you need your strawman pointed out to you?


Prove it. You just made a positive assertion. That puts the burden of proof upon you. No strawman arguments allowed. And no, I claim that it appears to be the most likely source. There is quite a bit of evidence for it, but you need to learn what is and what is not evidence first.

Once again prove it. You just claiming that does not make it true.

Your argument has been refuted as you formed it. Your inability to understand your failure does not mean that you succeeded.

Since there is no God assumption, then Gen 1 is exactly how God did it about 6000 years ago.,

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Gen 1

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since there is no God assumption, then Gen 1 is exactly how God did it about 6000 years ago.,

No, that is a non sequitur. There is no assumption about any God either way. There are millions of possible Gods, no one is assuming that any one particular God exists or does not exist. A "no God assumption" is an assumption that there is no God at all.

Even if there was a God of some sort it still could have used evolution as how life got to its current state. A competent God could do that. I know, you believe in an incompetent God. Why? No one knows.

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Gen 1

Sorry, but that is just a passage from a book of myths. Telling you that your book of myths has been refuted is not a "no God assumption".

Is English your first language? You seem to have trouble understanding it at times.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

No, that is a non sequitur. There is no assumption about any God either way. There are millions of possible Gods, no one is assuming that any one particular God exists or does not exist. A "no God assumption" is an assumption that there is no God at all.

Even if there was a God of some sort it still could have used evolution as how life got to its current state. A competent God could do that. I know, you believe in an incompetent God. Why? No one knows.



Sorry, but that is just a passage from a book of myths. Telling you that your book of myths has been refuted is not a "no God assumption".

Is English your first language? You seem to have trouble understanding it at times.

So you allow for some god but not the God of the Bible?