Yes, but how did it all get started in the first place?

[footprints]

Clairvoyance, nay; chronology, yay!

Chronology, Nay; Very Average Human, Yes.

Ain't science thread, is evolution thread.

It doesn't matter what the thread was, Evoloutionists will turn it to evolution simply because of their one track mind.

Black stars, quark stars, dark matter galaxies... next up, supersymmetry. But it ain't about fact, it's about postulate verifiable by observation and capable of making predictions. From what I understand about time travel D), it will never be likely to be verifiable "where it all came from." On a personal level, it is not even entirely verifiable that I am a nut from the family pecan tree. I don't "remember" being born, those people ain't got nothing to do with me. It's all hypothesis and conjecture, but I'm pecking away at these plastic keys anyway... maybe.

Many theories abound, it is what makes science interesting.

Causality is a nest of snakes. It has been argued elsewhere that "cause and effect" are just arbitrary labels for occurrence. It has been shown in experimentation that response to stimuli can "respond before stimuli" - nest of snakes, I say - but it is true that the cosmological models arising from causality trace entropy "back to the beginning" as it were. But I don't agree with your conclusions, that they are asking you to believe in nonsense. What the models do trace back to is perhaps a period in time where the "heat of creation" as it were was so - well, hot - that a veil was formed. The quark-plasma soup was opaque to radiation, meaning anything happening "inside" was prevented from propagating outward. I've never seen "beginning from nothing" mentioned in the literature beyond the official RCC website. It's cosmic vibration, quantum fluctuation, or cyclic a la Hawking et al. Or, my old line - in the beginning, there was uncertainty; somethings never change.

Sorry I do not believe in miracles, albeit you can.

Of course, I am psychically projecting incompetence - and you are falling into my web of delusion! Muah-ha-ha-ha-ha... :devil:

Yes you are and no I'm not.

Nah, don't do clairvoyance. I am my own hypothesis. By running my neck, considering thought inward and forming conception outward; in this manner I pave the road of subjective reality forward. If it does veer off into the wilderness, by speaking of it thusly I get an idea where not to go in the future.

No road is untravelled in the knowledge we now know.

And every day is a miracle. I rise from the death of sleep to be the fool again!

Miracles do not exist, just a lack of knowledge.

 

[footprints]

You're so clever:sarcastic

Inanity is never clever tumbleweed, not when I do it and not when you do it. In fact it is so simple even 5 year old children do it. However sometimes in conversations in this forum that is all a person is left with.

Yet that would not change the actual character of the tree.

You should read other posts. But what can I say, Yay, you are right. Neither does it change the full meaning of life because some people want to give it a narrow definition.

Yes, it is a vast conspiracy by biologist to exclude viruses, minerals and ghosts from "life".

Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself, they serve no purpose with me. And by the way, initially Biology was a bastardisation of many other scientific disciplines only in recent times is it starting to carve out a niche' for itself. To the best of my knowledge, if you want to have a conspiracy theory pertaining to this matter I think you should look to palaeontology (then again with Piltdown Man, now that was a real conspiracy theory, it might just twist your perception in your belief of conspiracy theories even further).

 

[Valjean]

Definitions are important. Without mutual agreement of a sound's meaning we couldn't communicate. A sound representing a thing or concept is what language is, and, as anyone who'se been on RF for any length of time can attest, even subtle differences in understanding can lead to complete confusion.
This quibbling just obfuscates. "Life" has a received definition in biology. Use it and communicate, or pick some other sound -- as long as all interlocuters agree on the meaning.
Save the quibbling for colloquialisms like "kind."

 

[footprints]

I'm talking about you giving cop-out arguments, which has nothing to do with how I'm responding to you. Notice when I respond, I try to give an answer to the best of my abilities, whereas you sometimes give a cop-out answer.



What in the hell are you babbling about? You gave evidence but no argument. The argument may be in the books so instead of me reading through the books which would have thousands of arguments, finding the right pages and so forth, why don't you merely provide it here? It's a simple thing, very simple. Why don't you want to provide the argument? You have the evidence already and I'm willing to hear the argument.



Your statement was "LOL", so explain how am I to observe it correctly? If you're counting, I've given the name and title of 2 books I've read and the other books I haven't given the names, titles, subjects, etc... . For you to conclude I haven't understood the objectivity in all those other books is laughable as the books are diverse. If you're going to insult me, then at least give an attempt to make it a plausible one that you can support. If you want to support your statement, then tell me how I've missed the objectivity in each book without knowing a single thing about the books I'm mentioning. Exactly, you cant.

As for the biases, we all have them, so what are you trying to show by that statement?



HAHAHA. I complimented you and you return with an insult! I said "first intelligent response" and part of your response is "I doubt it". Are you being honest or did you just misread what I wrote?



You said creationism is scientifically possible and I've thought about it but don't understand. I ask you for clarification and you still don't provide any. So, I'll ask again, how is creationism scientifically possible?

Malleus, I doubt that you will understand this, but when you chose to use the term, "Retarded Kid," you not only displayed your character and the rubbish in your brain, you also revealed some insight into your education and the level of your maturity.

Now I do understand that the young and the immature (for not all young people are immature) still have a lot to learn even though some might believe they know it all, and that the very old may be stuck in a time warp of bygone days and words like "Retarded," may be the only association they have in their heads which they can relate to, still all in all it is still a very derogative term and shouldn't be used, even though some in society may be excused for their ignorance.

Now I would suggest, if you want answers from me, which of course will take up my valuable time, then you start acting maturely and responsibily (adult like), then I will know that what I do for you, isn't a complete waste of time, that will not be met by instant denial of a closed and very narrow mind, but taken in by a very open and freethinking mind.

 

[imaginaryme]

Chronology, Nay; Very Average Human, Yes.

At the worst, the very worst, I scale out at 85% - more often than not, the tests show crap like 99.5%. Thus, I was wrong. you are just a donkey. I shall remain a fool, but even a fool has a measure of pride. If your time is valuable, thus too is mine, and you ain't worth it.

 

[footprints]

At the worst, the very worst, I scale out at 85% - more often than not, the tests show crap like 99.5%. Thus, I was wrong. you are just a donkey. I shall remain a fool, but even a fool has a measure of pride. If your time is valuable, thus too is mine, and you ain't worth it.

Like I said pretty average.

Yes you have used donkey rubbish before, kindergarten menatality, but mentality. Personally I would scale that at about 99.5 minus 95.5 or 4, your magical, mystical number.

If you shall remain a fool, I will not argue with you about that either. And yes, only a fool has pride.

 

[Malleus_de_Philosophia]

How is "first intelligent response" a complement?

Better than saying "more nonsense" or similar statements.

Malleus, I doubt that you will understand this, but when you chose to use the term, "Retarded Kid," you not only displayed your character and the rubbish in your brain, you also revealed some insight into your education and the level of your maturity.

Here is where you're wrong. It shows nothing of my level of education. I'll admit, it can show a level of my maturity on some topics but that is as far as it goes. I know you're trying to insult me but once again, you have no basis for the extrapolation you're trying to pull.

Now I do understand that the young and the immature (for not all young people are immature) still have a lot to learn even though some might believe they know it all, and that the very old may be stuck in a time warp of bygone days and words like "Retarded," may be the only association they have in their heads which they can relate to, still all in all it is still a very derogative term and shouldn't be used, even though some in society may be excused for their ignorance.

When did I say I know it all? Once again though, you're assuming things you have no basis for. You don't know the words I have in my head, although you can estimate my maturity.

Now I would suggest, if you want answers from me, which of course will take up my valuable time, then you start acting maturely and responsibily (adult like), then I will know that what I do for you, isn't a complete waste of time, that will not be met by instant denial of a closed and very narrow mind, but taken in by a very open and freethinking mind.

Oh come on, plenty of other posters have been mature and respectful to you and you have done the same stuff. Initially, I was very respectful and mature to you, however, times change. When I asked you how can creationism be scientific I was being sincere and emphasized that more than once but still got no answer. I'm not sure how you want me to ask you questions as in the past, you may have answered them but as it got more detailed, you didn't yet you acted as though you knew it all, just as you accuse me of.

To be fair though, let's wipe the slate clean and forget about the nonsense you and I said to one another. So, bearing this in mind, how can creationism be scientific?

 

[footprints]

Better than saying "more nonsense" or similar statements.



Here is where you're wrong. It shows nothing of my level of education. I'll admit, it can show a level of my maturity on some topics but that is as far as it goes. I know you're trying to insult me but once again, you have no basis for the extrapolation you're trying to pull.



When did I say I know it all? Once again though, you're assuming things you have no basis for. You don't know the words I have in my head, although you can estimate my maturity.



Oh come on, plenty of other posters have been mature and respectful to you and you have done the same stuff. Initially, I was very respectful and mature to you, however, times change. When I asked you how can creationism be scientific I was being sincere and emphasized that more than once but still got no answer. I'm not sure how you want me to ask you questions as in the past, you may have answered them but as it got more detailed, you didn't yet you acted as though you knew it all, just as you accuse me of.

To be fair though, let's wipe the slate clean and forget about the nonsense you and I said to one another. So, bearing this in mind, how can creationism be scientific?

Malleus, I am not trying to insult you, if I were I would do it outright. I am not afraid to voice my own opinion, and I really do not care what narrow minded people think of this, that is their problem to deal with not mine and they most certainly will not make their problem my problem.

You want to give me warped intelligence, you better believe I will give it straight back to you, I don't want it, I do not need it and you will not make your problem my problem. An intelligent person would learn to stop doing it the first time it came back to them, however people with warped intelligence believe it is intelligent and keep doing the same thing over and over again.

So far not you, nor anybody else in this forum has shown me anything I didn't already know. Just repeating the same repetitive dogma I have heard, read about or inquired into before. I am not really interested in what the world knows, my interests are so far past that now it isn't funny, I want to know what the world doesn't know. That is just me though, so you and people like you want to be part of the status quo, what can I say, if that works for you, it works for you, many people live their lives in other peoples thinking. Me I just used other peoples thinking to get me to the next level, I thank them for the knowledge they gave me, I respect them for the valuable insight they had and passed on to me and can clearly see things from their perspective and down many lines I fully concur with their diagnosis, when I base it on their perspective. However in order to honour my teachers, I must in all respect take it to the next level, this though comes with disrespect attached to it, for in respect I must disrespect them in order to do so for they will fight in order to keep the status quo which they do know, that is just human intelligence for you. In order to prove something to them, I must prove them wrong.

On many plains I have found things the world does not know. To quote another poster what I have found fills more than 600 pages. Respect though stops me from publishing, in order to understand this, you must first be able to understand why and what Einsteins greatest regret was.

 

[regulo]

This is one of the discussions i used to have a lot of and i decided that evolution is like learning. I cant see how anything stands still because it has to grow and learn and be better. I see that as the reason for being anything at all and its to do with improving and being imaginative and i think natures like that to. When you knit a scarf the first time you maybe add nothing to the shape and then the next time you might put in a colour or make a V at the end and thats you growing so you teach your daughter and she starts with a color and a V and then adds a hole or something but it doesnt catch on so she stops m aking them with holes and adds tasssles or something of such and next thing is its nothing like the shape you showed her so thats evolution. Maybe evolution is nature being artistic. Anyway its definitely tryhing to improve things and not make everything stay like the first scarf or make it go back into a ball of wool.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

Malleus, I am not trying to insult you, if I were I would do it outright. I am not afraid to voice my own opinion, and I really do not care what narrow minded people think of this, that is their problem to deal with not mine and they most certainly will not make their problem my problem.

You want to give me warped intelligence, you better believe I will give it straight back to you, I don't want it, I do not need it and you will not make your problem my problem. An intelligent person would learn to stop doing it the first time it came back to them, however people with warped intelligence believe it is intelligent and keep doing the same thing over and over again.

So far not you, nor anybody else in this forum has shown me anything I didn't already know. Just repeating the same repetitive dogma I have heard, read about or inquired into before. I am not really interested in what the world knows, my interests are so far past that now it isn't funny, I want to know what the world doesn't know. That is just me though, so you and people like you want to be part of the status quo, what can I say, if that works for you, it works for you, many people live their lives in other peoples thinking. Me I just used other peoples thinking to get me to the next level, I thank them for the knowledge they gave me, I respect them for the valuable insight they had and passed on to me and can clearly see things from their perspective and down many lines I fully concur with their diagnosis, when I base it on their perspective. However in order to honour my teachers, I must in all respect take it to the next level, this though comes with disrespect attached to it, for in respect I must disrespect them in order to do so for they will fight in order to keep the status quo which they do know, that is just human intelligence for you. In order to prove something to them, I must prove them wrong.

On many plains I have found things the world does not know. To quote another poster what I have found fills more than 600 pages. Respect though stops me from publishing, in order to understand this, you must first be able to understand why and what Einsteins greatest regret was.

Oh great, come on a debate forum and then refuse to listen to what others have to say, someone's open-minded.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Neither does it change the full meaning of life because some people want to give it a narrow definition.



Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself, they serve no purpose with me.

Life only has a specific meaning in science because some humans gave it that terminology then indoctrinated every educated person who followed that line with the same belief.

Honestly, it's like having a debate with a ten year old.....

 

[Valjean]

Is this thread about abiogenesis/evolution or semantics?
As long as two people can agree on a definition there is communication. Agree on a definition and get on with the discussion, already.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Is this thread about abiogenesis/evolution or semantics?
As long as two people can agree on a definition there is communication. Agree on a definition and get on with the discussion, already.

LIFE,
In biology, the science of living organisms, "life" is the condition which distinguishes active organisms from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, functional activity and the continual change preceding death.
WIKI


Now, back to abiogenesis.....

 

[imaginaryme]

4.

There ain't no debate with some people who are mere manifestations of chaos, for the ordered structure of reason requires its explorers to climb amongst its branches and meet halfway. Yet, the world would be a boring place without people like footprints. I just ain't dealing with him on this thread no more.

 

[footprints]

Oh great, come on a debate forum and then refuse to listen to what others have to say, someone's open-minded.

A very good example of human perception and how it can flaw our personal and peer relatated observation.

Hmmm, so you hear what people say? That must be what I am doing wrong, I read what people have to say in forums like this, I only listen when people are talking where I can hear them.

Do you like hear other voices in your head as well?

 

[fantome profane]

Do you like hear other voices in your head as well?

Where do you hear voices? In your feet perhaps?

 

[footprints]

Honestly, it's like having a debate with a ten year old.....

When you want to put your belief patterns in a debate, as your belief patterns in the quote above, the debate is reduced to a childish squabble.

As I previously said, sometimes all you are left with is childish nonsense. Thank you for your example of this, but honestly you didn't have to, you have provided so many other examples in the past which I have replied to.

 

[footprints]

Is this thread about abiogenesis/evolution or semantics?
As long as two people can agree on a definition there is communication. Agree on a definition and get on with the discussion, already.

Seyorni, whether you know this or not, the debate was over long ago. It is the prime reason why personal beliefs were being raised more and more. When people get stuck and cannot answer questions they revert more and more to the status quo which they know and which they can, at the very least, prove to themselves is correct.

Without Physics (how the universe was created) we cannot have Chemistry (abiogenesis or any other chemical change or interaction). Without Chemistry we cannot have evolution. It doesn't get any more simple than that. At this present moment in time, Physics the base foundation of this natural path in life is flawed. Okay, flawed may not be the best word to use, let us say unknown. A deity is just as an acceptable, intelligent, rational and logical explanation as any other power of suggestion which life has to offer as just one example, many other power of suggestions abound.

One of the most silly parts of all this is, we as a species cannot even define what the Universe is. Sounds like the deity debate doesn't it. We still have much to learn.

Scientific Method tries to take the human element out of science, humans get involved and the human element is put right back in again. A catch 22 that we just can't win and the prime reason science moves so slowly at times.

Human observation by its very nature is flawed. Whether this be by personal observation or peer related association, on an individual level all people of the same peer group naturally observe the same thing on the same level be this in science or be this in religion/atheism and another fact of life we cannot change. Well we can, as a species we just don't bother. What we observe is directly associated with our belief patterns and the perceptions we derive from external knowledge gained when intermixed with internal knowledge known and accepted. The scientific quote from this "People will find whatever they are looking for in any given thing." Alternately, "People will make themselves comfortable in any given situation." Both statements pretty much mean the same thing, albeit said differently.

Words are already defined, if you are unsure of this pick up a dictionary, but not just one brand, every brand and from every culture on earth. After you have done that, pick up every other reference source available on earth which the dictionaries may have omitted for one reason or another. Science wants to narrow the definition of life, there is a good reason for this, it suits their purpose (agenda as one poster put it), and makes thier belief more credible, albeit at the same time inhibits critical thinking.

 

[footprints]

LIFE,
In biology, the science of living organisms, "life" is the condition which distinguishes active organisms from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, functional activity and the continual change preceding death.
WIKI


Now, back to abiogenesis.....

I choose the navajo definition. The universe and everything in it is life.

Now back to how did it all get started in the first place.

 

[footprints]

4.

There ain't no debate with some people who are mere manifestations of chaos, for the ordered structure of reason requires its explorers to climb amongst its branches and meet halfway. Yet, the world would be a boring place without people like footprints. I just ain't dealing with him on this thread no more.

LOL you have never dealt with me imaginaryme, I do not buy into magic and other peoples imaginations.

I think what you mean to say is there ain't no debate with people who do not share your same beliefs. There is no half way where truth is concerned, albeit there is compromise of beliefs. One cannot compromise when they share the same beliefs they can only agree, albeit some people are so stuck on their beliefs they just cannot for the life of them see the agreement in it, only that which from their own imagination opposes their own belief. Such is human observation and perception for you.