Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hey sf-indy-fan...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hey sf-indy-fan...

    “ Some scientists took CO2, H2O, and other gasses, put them in a large glass vessel, ran electrodes to the vessel, made a spark go across the inside of the vessel, and found that amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, were formed by the electrical charge. The purpose of the experiment was to simulate the conditions of the early Earth, with lots of lightning storms and noxious gasses everywhere, to see precisely if some sort of
    "chemical evolution" could result. “

    “...geologists no longer think that the early atmosphere resembled the gas mixture in Miller's flask...methane and ammonia were unlikely ever to have been present in abundance.”

    Davies, Paul - THE FIFTH MIRACLE, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1999) p. 87

    “...chemists have never succeeded in...the creation of life
    out of nonliving matter.”

    Jastrow, Robert - THE ENCHANTED LOOM, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1981) p. 19

    “Considering the way the prebiotic soup is referred to in so many discussions of the origin of life it comes as something of a shock to realize that there is absolutely no positive evidence for its existence.”

    Denton, Michael - EVOLUTION: A THEORY IN CRISIS, (London: Burnett Books, 1985) p. 261

    “The very best Miller-Urey chemistry...does not take us very
    far along the path to a living organism.”

    Shapiro, Robert - ORIGINS, (NY: Bantam Books, 1987) p. 116

    “A growing body of evidence supports the view that substantial quantities of molecular oxygen existed very early...If early earth atmosphere was strongly oxidized...then no chemical evolution ever occurred.”

    Thaxton, Charles B., Bradley, Walter L. & Olsen, Roger L. THE MYSTERY OF LIFE'S ORIGIN, (NY: Philosophical Library, 1984) p. 182

    “...enormously complex molecules...are required...for the so-called `simplest' creatures. The biggest problem in biology lies in their origin...The recourse to an organic soup...is evidently a blatant recourse to the spontaneous generation theory...Nevertheless, most scientists, even to this day, have been satisfied to accept it.”

    Hoyle, Fred & Wickramasinghe, Chandra - EVOLUTION FROM SPACE, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1981) p. 37

    Let's continue...

  • #2
    Howard, here is what you posted:
    chemical evolution has...not [been] demonstrated.
    The research in question is a clear demonstration of chemical evolution, i.e. simple molecules combining to form more complex ones. Maybe we need to distinguish between "evolution" with a capital E and with a small e.

    Somehow I thought this was about something else...
    "I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend." - Thomas Jefferson

    RIP, Dan. You will always be one of my heroes.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by sf-indy-fan

      Somehow I thought this was about something else...
      As did I, so glad it was just typical hdolan babble that I try to avoid reading on this board...
      sigh, some people just need a life outside of this place, no?
      "I love the smell of fresh cut wood, to see its veins or grain, to touch and shape it into something new and soft (or Ruff) for a gift to be loved and appreciated by someone..."

      -Richard Kearney

      Comment


      • #4
        Don't underestimate Mr. Dolan. He's read more on creation/evolution than your average college faculty. Some day he'll get it all right too!
        "If TF members were given solid gold cars, some would complain about the color." - stnkypete

        Comment


        • #5
          Big Bang theory

          God said it- BANG! it happened

          I try to be a good Christian.

          Once in a while I succeed
          Live like Dave

          Comment


          • #6
            "As did I, so glad it was just typical hdolan babble that I try to avoid reading on this board...sigh, some people just need a life outside of this place, no?"

            Care to refute what I have posted...there has never been any chemical evolution demonstrated in the lab or anywhere else for that matter...to concoct a few amino acids is a long way from creating something as complex as a cell...

            The commonplace story says that quite by accident, in a primordial soup, all the goodies got togethere and begat life...this, of course, is what is commonly referred to as spontaneous generation...

            "Note that chemical evolution is a special case of
            spontaneous generation..."

            Dodson, Edward O. & Dodson, Peter - EVOLUTION: Process and Product, (Boston: Prindle, Weber & Schmidt, 1985) p. 349

            "Chemical evolution, the modern theory of the origin of
            life...rests on the idea of spontaneous generation."

            Horowitz, Norman H. - TO UTOPIA AND BACK, (NY: W.H. Freeman & Co., 1986) p. 37

            "How likely was it, given a soup of one sort or another, that
            a system arose spontaneously which could evolve by natural selection? Here we face formidable problems."

            Crick, Francis - LIFE ITSELF, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1981) p. 8O

            "Certainly nobody has been able to cook up a primitive soup
            with water, a few gasses and ultraviolet light (or some
            other energy source) and let it stew away till a neat RNA
            replicating system arose."

            Crick, Francis - LIFE ITSELF, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1981) p. 85

            Now, what was that about a life beyond these forums...

            Comment


            • #7
              I have always felt that science is it's own religion anyway.

              Just as many will use events (comets, etc) to "prove" their beliefs are true, so will science set up an "experiment" to prove what they believe to be true also.

              I like the fact that there is always a shade of doubt, it leaves room for faith that way.

              Comment


              • #8
                Jeeeesus. And we thought arguing about the IRL versus c^rt had gotten old.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I don't get all the fuss. I don't fret over the fact that it took more than 6 days to create the heavens, the earth and all that inhabits it.

                  I do believe that God created the world, but it doesn't bother me that he used the Big Bang, Evolution and an Ice Age to get us here.

                  Can we prove that Evolution is a fact instead of theroy?

                  One would think so, I mean if we have the technical knowledge to fake a moon landing and still over 30 years later we are still buying it then I'm sure that one day they will be able to pull this one off too.

                  "Ooh woo, I'm a Rebel just for kicks, now
                  I been feeling it since 1966, now..."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have always felt that science is it's own religion anyway.

                    “There is a kind of religion in science...”

                    Jastrow, Robert - GOD AND THE ASTRONOMERS, (NY: W.W. Norton, 1978) p. 113

                    “Directed by all-powerful selection, chance becomes a sort of providence which, under the cover of atheism, is not named but which is secretly worshipped...”

                    Grasse, Pierre P. - EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS (NY:Academic Press, 1977) p. 10

                    “For three hundred years, science has based itself on reductionism and materialism, leading inevitably to atheism and a belief in the meaninglessness of physical existence.”

                    Davies, Paul - THE FIFTH MIRACLE, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1999) p. 263

                    “I do believe that God created the world, but it doesn't bother me that he used the Big Bang, Evolution and an Ice Age to get us here.”

                    "The bang did not occur at a point in space at all. Space
                    itself came into existence with the big bang...What happened before the big bang? The answer is, there was no '"before." Time itself began at the big bang."

                    Davies, Paul - THE MIND OF GOD, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1992) p. 50

                    "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle..."

                    Crick, Francis - LIFE ITSELF, (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1981) p. 88

                    "Despite the efforts of liberal theology to disguise the point, the fact is that no biblically derived religion can really be compromised with the fundamental assertion of Darwinian theory, Chance and design are antithetical concepts, and the decline in religious belief
                    can probably be attributed more to the propagation and advocacy by the intellectual and scientific community of the Darwinian version of evolution than any other factor.”

                    Denton, Michael - EVOLUTION: A THEORY IN CRISIS, (London: Burnett Books, 1985) p. 66

                    By the way, all sources cited are evolutionists...

                    Comment

                    Unconfigured Ad Widget

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X