The Strange Thing about Creationism

[Shermana]

[/left]
Considering each individual human has approximately 120 mutations in their DNA and yet populations continue to grow exponentially despite fertility rates well below 4 per couple, don't you think that Dr. Pitman's assumptions about the frequency of deleterious mutations may be just a little off?

Compare these mutations to the ones in question in the study, in terms of proportion and placement.

 

[outhouse]

From what I understand, even at a dimmer Sun, the UV without an Ozone would be, depending on location, 2-10 times higher than current. Which of these extremophiles can produce the O2 necessary for the Ozone layer to form in the first place?

In order for it to be proven that Stromatolites existed before the Ozone layer, there'd have to be a way to calculate their ability to withstand the particular UV levels they endured pre-Ozone.

Until then, the Ozone layer had to have come first.

Your going about this clueless and backwards.

with water there would be a atmosphere

 

[Shermana]

Your going about this clueless and backwards.

with water there would be a atmosphere

What does that have to do with what formed the Ozone?

 

[outhouse]

What does that have to do with what formed the Ozone?

you mean lightning from clouds developed over the ocean the cyano grew in.

get real ,,,,,,,,,,,,, the ocean had been here for almost a billion years before the formation of cyano

 

[Shermana]

you mean lightning from clouds developed over the ocean the cyano grew in.

get real ,,,,,,,,,,,,, the ocean had been here for almost a billion years before the formation of cyano

I don't think you're on track to what I'm saying.

The Ozone layer was supposedly formed by Cyanobacteria that lived near the surface.

As proven with that other link, UV penetration through water is much stronger than previously thought.

 

[tumbleweed41]

O3 (ozone) is formed when UV-C from the Sun dissociates an oxygen molecule, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Or when lightning dissociating oxygen molecules, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Now Cyanobacteria, produce O2 (oxygen), which in turn produces O3 (ozone) as outlined above.
Cyanobacteria, have been shown to protect themselves from UV-B through gliding, gas-vesicles, and production of UV-B absorbing compounds.

Now, if you are done with your weak attacks on biology and photosynthesis, perhaps you would like to provide us with the empirical objective evidence that leads to the logical conclusion of Creationism.
​

 

[Shermana]

O3 (ozone) is formed when UV-C from the Sun dissociates an oxygen molecule, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Or when lightning dissociating oxygen molecules, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Now Cyanobacteria, produce O2 (oxygen), which in turn produces O3 (ozone) as outlined above.
Cyanobacteria, have been shown to protect themselves from UV-B through gliding, gas-vesicles, and production of UV-B absorbing compounds.

Now, if you are done with your weak attacks on biology and photosynthesis, perhaps you would like to provide us with the empirical objective evidence that leads to the logical conclusion of Creationism.
​

You have not shown in any way how they would have survived the UV intensity before the Ozone. Until then, I've proven that the Genesis order of events is correct since the "Ozone" must have existed before the sun.

If you have a link for empirical evidence showing how the Cyanobacteria can survive the UV at specifically Pre-Ozone intensity, (i.e. between 2-10x the intensity) perhaps you will be able to say otherwise.

Until then, there is evidence that CB can protect itself from UV at POST Ozone intensity. There is no proof otherwise.

Now why don't you start by saying what kind of info you'd consider to be proof of Creation. What would be your criteria, I think I've already demonstrated the severe drawbacks of rapid mutation, so what exactly are you looking for and I'll see if I can find it. Does the Paper have to necessarily agree with the conclusion that the Theory is wrong or can I highlight some of the data from it that configures with your criteria?

 

[outhouse]

I don't think you're on track to what I'm saying.

oh im on track, and know your wrong

The Ozone layer was supposedly formed by Cyanobacteria that lived near the surface.

says who, so far only you. and its wrong.

lightning will produce ozone

lightning in rain clouds and volcanic clouds


get with the programming, you shotgun garbage at the wall only praying it will stick and your failing at every attempt

we all know its out of desperation

 

[outhouse]

As proven with that other link, UV penetration through water is much stronger than previously thought.

who cares

your point is invalid

you fail

 

[Amill]

You have not shown in any way how they would have survived the UV intensity before the Ozone. Until then, I've proven that the Genesis order of events is correct since the "Ozone" must have existed before the sun.

Lmao. Let's look at your logic.

Bacteria hasn't been proven to be able to withstand UV radiation before we had a complete ozone. Therefore the ozone must have existed before the sun and the entire Universe was created in 6 days.

I like it.:bow:

 

[Shermana]

Lmao. Let's look at your logic.

Bacteria hasn't been proven to be able to withstand UV radiation before we had a complete ozone. Therefore the ozone must have existed before the sun and the entire Universe was created in 6 days.

I like it.:bow:

Glad you like it, let me know when you have proof that oxygen-producing life could have possibly existed before the Ozone.

 

[madnessinmysoul]

Glad you like it, let me know when you have proof that oxygen-producing life could have possibly existed before the Ozone.

Why is that necessary?

 

[outhouse]

Glad you like it, let me know when you have proof that oxygen-producing life could have possibly existed before the Ozone.

you really dont have a clue do you????


it didnt, its only your ignorant comment

water had been around for almost a billion years before life was known.

lightning was here longer, thuis ozone was here before life.


once again you fail

 

[outhouse]

Why is that necessary?

it isnt

this is more then likely a previously banned member returning to be banned once again

 

[tarekabdo12]

I often see the Evolution vs Creation debate, but one thing I cannot help notice is that Creationism seems to be less about proving a creation, and more about proving the Bible's account of creation as literally true.

Surely if Creationism was only about proving a creator it would be inclusive of Hindus, Muslims, Pagans, and others with other creation myths. Instead all I see is an attempt to prove the Bible's account as science.

That brings me to the question of the thread- is Creationism more about proving a creator, or more about Creationists wanting to believe that the Bible should be taken entirely literally?

I actually don't do so and when I think about an idea I search for evidence for it. Simply, I believe in creation as I see that every complicated thing must have a great designer and it's very strange to believe any other alternative. How can something come out of nothing? And how can random mutation lead to great product? It's something that appears like a phantom or an imaginary movie that has no relation to reality or valid conclusive evidences.

 

[tarekabdo12]

O3 (ozone) is formed when UV-C from the Sun dissociates an oxygen molecule, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Or when lightning dissociating oxygen molecules, and some of those now-loose oxygen molecules connect with an oxygen molecule to form ozone.

Now Cyanobacteria, produce O2 (oxygen), which in turn produces O3 (ozone) as outlined above.
Cyanobacteria, have been shown to protect themselves from UV-B through gliding, gas-vesicles, and production of UV-B absorbing compounds.

Now, if you are done with your weak attacks on biology and photosynthesis, perhaps you would like to provide us with the empirical objective evidence that leads to the logical conclusion of Creationism.
​

What's supposed to give out? You can see that the whole world with its all systems and all circumstances must be created at the same time and in the most efficient way. This can't be explained by gradual transition.The ozone , the water, the land , the whole systems must be present collectively at the same time to provide life for the creations and in the best efficacy as any slight change in the rules of nature would lead to a calamitous effect on living cells and organisms.

In addition, you can hardly say that original complicated cell was created by random chance as the whole cell components must be present at the same time and in their greatest complexity and efficacy for life to maintain. Even the most primitive unicellular organisms have very complicated systems that are more complex that a current industrialized city.

 

[Android]

Why did you quote Tumbleweed there?
You completely ingnored everything he just said to you.

 

[tumbleweed41]

What's supposed to give out? You can see that the whole world with its all systems and all circumstances must be created at the same time and in the most efficient way. This can't be explained by gradual transition.The ozone , the water, the land , the whole systems must be present collectively at the same time to provide life for the creations and in the best efficacy as any slight change in the rules of nature would lead to a calamitous effect on living cells and organisms.

In addition, you can hardly say that original complicated cell was created by random chance as the whole cell components must be present at the same time and in their greatest complexity and efficacy for life to maintain. Even the most primitive unicellular organisms have very complicated systems that are more complex that a current industrialized city.

"Must have been..."?
Those "rules of nature" you speak of are exactly what make biological evolution possible.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Now why don't you start by saying what kind of info you'd consider to be proof of Creation. What would be your criteria, I think I've already demonstrated the severe drawbacks of rapid mutation, so what exactly are you looking for and I'll see if I can find it. Does the Paper have to necessarily agree with the conclusion that the Theory is wrong or can I highlight some of the data from it that configures with your criteria?

Empirical objective evidence that leads to the logical conclusion of Creationism.

 

[waitasec]

strange thing about creationism....