• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Strange Thing about Creationism

Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
Well if you see that I included the "1" in the quote, what I said was "Let's see what that key reference is exactly", the point is: "Let's see what exactly they're saying in this reference here". I did indeed click on the ONLY reference in that article which is the "1" in the quote.

Your quote from the critique proves my point of why I said you didn't quote from it, there's nothing in it that actually goes against the specifics and details. I do enjoy reading pieces that stay away from the actual specifics and try to attack the base foundation alone, it's entertaining.

Wait, did I already post that article prevoiusly that it refers to?
 
Last edited:
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Sheesh guys, pull your heads out of your arses for a sec. Don't you remember back when "Signature in the Cell" was first released, and the bombshell effect it had on the scientific community? How everyone in the biological sciences was stunned by the devastating arguments it contained? How so soon after its release, every major university started using it and required incoming freshmen to be knowledgeable in ID creationism? Remember?

Nah...I don't either.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
painted wolf said:
The specifics and details is that he ignores the actual research being done, and he provides evidence that research is being done and is addressing the issues of abiogenesis.

For example: Life As We Know It Nearly Created in Lab | LiveScience

wa:do
Click to expand...


3214-life-created-lab.html

Only when a system is developed in the lab that has the capability of evolving novel functions on its own can it be properly called life, Joyce said. In short, the molecules in Joyce's lab can't evolve any totally new tricks, he said.
Click to expand...
 
painted wolf

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Which is why it's still "nearly" and not simply "life created in lab".

The fact remains that every year scientists get closer and closer to replicating the first living things.

wa:do
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
painted wolf said:
Which is why it's still "nearly" and not simply "life created in lab".

The fact remains that every year scientists get closer and closer to replicating the first living things.

wa:do
Click to expand...

Okay, so what can be proven exactly from this "near life", that it requires skillful intelligent design and intervention to make anything close to near life? And how does it render anything what he said incorrect.
 
Gunfingers

Gunfingers

Happiness Incarnate
More that life can arise through natural ("natural" in this case is as-opposed-to "supernatural" rather than "natural" as-opposed-to "man made") processes, and divine intervention is not necessary.

Plus it's just pretty cool.

Edit to add: I'm sure Painted Wolf is flattered that you consider biologists on par with your god, though. :)
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
How are these "Synthesized" RNA structures "basic chemistry", and what are the conditions involved in this experiment specifically?
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
Gunfingers said:
More that life can arise through natural ("natural" in this case is as-opposed-to "supernatural" rather than "natural" as-opposed-to "man made") processes, and divine intervention is not necessary.

Plus it's just pretty cool.

Edit to add: I'm sure Painted Wolf is flattered that you consider biologists on par with your god, though. :)
Click to expand...

Let me know when they actually create life, and if by "on par" you mean the ability to create humans and monkeys and dolphins, this isn't even anywhere close. "One day they'll do it!" Okay, so one day if that happens you'll be able to say something. And that day's never gonna come. I do see some very nasty Nanotechnology and Bio-machine experiments upcoming though.
 
tumbleweed41

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
tumbleweed41 said:
The virus/bacterium was just an example of what you get when a lay-man tries to write about something he has no education or background in.

Now, if you want to bring some cellular microbiology evidence to the table, at least attempt to find some peer reviewed research done by someone who is an actual expert in the field.
Click to expand...

Shermana said:
Or he could have used the word "Virulent" completely right and Mr. Matheson is trying to nitpick whatever he can. I'd like to see any other complaints, and I'd like to see why his critique is in any way justified. The word "Virulent" can apply to more than viruses. Why gee...it applies to Bacteriology. I can understand things like this happen though, Painted Wolf learned the other day that "Microspeciation" can apply to living creatures for example.

I'd seriously like to have Mr. Matheson comment on this issue of the uses of the word "Virulent" and whether there truly is an error at stake.

"
–adjective 1. actively poisonous; intensely noxious: a virulent insect bite.

2. Medicine/Medical . highly infective; malignant or deadly.

3. Bacteriology . causing clinical symptoms.
Click to expand...


Like I said, if you want to bring some cellular microbiology evidence to the table, at least attempt to find some peer reviewed research done by someone who is an actual expert in the field.
 
camanintx

camanintx

Well-Known Member
Shermana said:
Let me know when they actually create life, and if by "on par" you mean the ability to create humans and monkeys and dolphins, this isn't even anywhere close. "One day they'll do it!" Okay, so one day if that happens you'll be able to say something. And that day's never gonna come. I do see some very nasty Nanotechnology and Bio-machine experiments upcoming though.
Click to expand...
Be reasonable Shermana. Nature took about 3.5 billion years to get to humans, monkeys and dolphins. We've only been at it a few decades. Not even the people working on these experiments are that optimistic.
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
camanintx said:
Be reasonable Shermana. Nature took about 3.5 billion years to get to humans, monkeys and dolphins. We've only been at it a few decades. Not even the people working on these experiments are that optimistic.
Click to expand...

With currently known theory, it wouldn't be possible in a trillion years. How many beneficial mutations do you think are involved to go from apeman to man?

The experiment of creating a self-replicating RNA structure in a controlled laboratory environment is very interesting, but it doesn't say a thing about how it could create evolving RNA forms. They created a Zombie cell chassis basically which is interesting in future nanotechnology projects but I can see little else.
 
David M

David M

Well-Known Member
Shermana said:
How is ozone layer formed by oxygen during lightning

I love the sound of that quote, let me repeat that: ". Ozone formed in the lower atmosphere does not survive the time it takes (on the order of months) to diffuse all the way up to the "ozone layer"
Click to expand...

Note the phrase "formed in the lower atmosphere".

Unfortunately for you not all lightning occurs in the lower atmosphere and the ozone that results when nitrogen dioxide produced by lightning is broken down by sunlight can last a long time.

Until recently, most studies of ozone and lightning have focused on measuring the production of nitrogen oxides in the immediate vicinity of storms. However, the resulting ozone has a long lifetime in the upper troposphere (a few miles above the ground), so it could be carried over long distances. According to an NCAR analysis, ozone from storms across southern Africa is being transported by the subtropical jet stream eastward to Australia, where it causes significant rises in ozone levels in the upper troposphere.
Click to expand...
Source: Lightning: FAQ
 
David M

David M

Well-Known Member
Shermana said:
You must have missed several posts ,this is about what created the Ozone.

If Extremeophiles didn't create Oxygen, then they are irrelevant to the conversation.

If you are harping on the use of the word "No life before the Ozone", then please prove that these Extremophiles did in fact exist without the Ozone, with quotes. But this is about what kind of Oxygen-creating life produced the Ozone. Telling me that this is why Creationists get laughed at does not count as a substitute answer.
Click to expand...

I think you don't know what an extremophile is.

There are existing extremophile prokaryotic phototrophs (including cyanobactera) living in Antartica that survive under the increased UV levels due to the very thin ozone layer, in the summer the ozone layer over the antarctic can be less then 20% of the level found elsewhere.

So there you are, cyanobacteria can survive in high UV levels today and similar marine bacteria would have been able to survive in the UV levels of the early earth (note that the sun was producing less UV back then).

You can check Algae and cyanobacteria in extreme environments By Joseph Seckbach for more information.

Your whole argument that life could not have arisen without an ozone layer being present is nonsense.
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
David M said:
I think you don't know what an extremophile is.

There are existing extremophile prokaryotic phototrophs (including cyanobactera) living in Antartica that survive under the increased UV levels due to the very thin ozone layer, in the summer the ozone layer over the antarctic can be less then 20% of the level found elsewhere.

So there you are, cyanobacteria can survive in high UV levels today and similar marine bacteria would have been able to survive in the UV levels of the early earth (note that the sun was producing less UV back then).

You can check Algae and cyanobacteria in extreme environments By Joseph Seckbach for more information.

Your whole argument that life could not have arisen without an ozone layer being present is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Show a link to how well and how much stromatolites/cyanobacteria/oxygen producing "plants" (plantlike things) can survive in 20% Ozone coverage in Antarctica and I'll throw it into the calculation. Is there an online version of Seckbach's book that shows exactly the details?

Edit: Found it, perhaps you can point to which page has the details to back up your claim?
http://books.google.com/books?id=pH...&resnum=3&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top