The Questions That Abiogenesis Needs To Answer, Before Evolution.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Regardless.. Are you saying that anyone who supports the theory of evolution and also feels their life has meaning, is feeling a false sense of fulfillment?

Well it all depends really, an example would be, if you think you just die and that's the end to it, then you have no purpose, have you noticed yet how short life is?

What could possibly be your purpose other than self gratification. By that I mean everything you do, even if done for others, is just you experiencing your life and perhaps feeling fulfilled because you did a few good deeds, but ultimately that is self centric. You cannot get away from self if you believe that this is your only life.

If you understand that you are reborn time after time and that your deeds are subject to cause and affect then your life has purpose as a school for your spiritual being. So yes, if your fulfilment is self centric and derived from pleasing yourself, then your life is hollow and not truly fulfilling.

What part of the theory of evolution denies anyone from discovering who and what they really are

Evolution theory tells you that you are a piece of meat that blips into existence for an incredibly short space of time and then blips out again. NOT fulfilling at all. No meaning whatsoever!

You obviously think you are a piece of meat who runs the very real danger of having your bones reconstructed in 20,000 years time by some irreverent (beep) who still thinks evolution theory will provide answers.

If you understand the meaning of life and are fulfilled, mind sharing it with the rest of us (or I guess giving me a refresher since you may have told me before)

Yes I have told you before, and no I try not to repeat myself.

And since you are so happy with your life as an animated kebab, would you mind sharing that pizza and beer.

a reply to: moebius

ROFL, just another religious bigot. (watch out for dog hairs)

You may feel that YOUR life without a god or creator is meaningless and hollow, but that doesn't mean that others do.

What is that puerile gurgling I hear, yet someone else with zero comprehension. I would suggest that you are in no position to make that judgment as you have not yet been blessed with intuition.The evidence I referred to in a previous post is something you will discover eventually, it may take a few life times but eternity ensures that we will all receive a knowledge of reality. All in the context of abiogenesis of course.

originally posted by: kennyb72
Yes I have told you before, and no I try not to repeat myself.

Forgive me for not wanting to take all the time to dig through a 90+ page thread to find all of your contradictory posts therein, just to refresh myself. You could have summed it up here quickly, and easily enough. How very selfless of you. Considering you just got done telling me your deeds are subject to cause and effect and your life is a school for your spiritual being, I wonder what grade you'll get for the condescending arrogance you display.

Just this meatbag's opinion!

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

OK, I forgive you.

I explained much about my beliefs in that last thread and yet I barely scratched the surface. No I am not interested whether you understand my viewpoint or not. I am not here to preach anything, I am expressing my views the same as you all. I am not compelled to explain them,

Considering you just got done telling me your deeds are subject to cause and effect and your life is a school for your spiritual being, I wonder what grade you'll get for the condescending arrogance you display.

Condescending arrogance, is that what it is?

There was I, reading through all of the posts and I picked up this general way you guys talk to others and I thought, 'thats a cool way to communicate', I'll speak the same way as they do so I will be accepted by these cool guys, and now you tell me it is condescending and arrogant, well who'd have thunk.

Just this meatbag's opinion!

Sorry! I don't relate very well with kebabs "NOT COOL"

a reply to: kennyb72

The way others post doesn't reflect how I post nor does how I post reflect how others may post. You mistakenly lump me into some non existent militant brigade. I don't know who you mean by "you guys". I don't really care either. I call them as I see them, whatever they believe and whoever they are.

As for the subject of the thread.

Yes I support evolution. Beyond that you don't know what my beliefs are. So please don't make uneducated assumptions about me. I have made none about you.

a reply to: Noinden

Again your trying to separate the two, which is entirely illogical. The origin of life would have to kick start evolution. They are not separate no matter how much you want them to be. You're sitting there ignoring something simply because it challenges your current belief system.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Noinden

Again your trying to separate the two, which is entirely illogical. The origin of life would have to kick start evolution. They are not separate no matter how much you want them to be. You're sitting there ignoring something simply because it challenges your current belief system.

The processes involved in the theory of evolution have not been shown to be applicable to the forming of the first building blocks of life, so yeah they're entirely separate.

Creationists in their supernatural world think that as the origins of life has not yet been fully explained they have a 'gotcha!' moment when it comes to the comprehensive explanation for the diversity of life that is evolution.

Could it be that creationists fear evolution as it leads to the conclusion that there would then be no Adam, no sin and thus no Jesus?

Is this why they work so hard to twist and misinterpret science?

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
Again your trying to separate the two, which is entirely illogical. The origin of life would have to kick start evolution. They are not separate no matter how much you want them to be.

I think the word everyone is looking for is "distinct". Evolution is dependent on the origin but that doesn't make them the same.

Another problem is that the study of these two processes are seperate, which I think is what others have tried to point out. Science does this because it works on small amounts of data at a time. It's not like scientists can figure out how the universe came to be in six days and then take a day off.

You're sitting there ignoring something simply because it challenges your current belief system.

Anyone else getting tired of this lame tactic?

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

The way others post doesn't reflect how I post nor does how I post reflect how others may post.

I guess then that it is my turn to apologise to you. I had judged you guilty by association as you tend to appear in the same threads as the 'evothugs'

You mistakenly lump me into some non existent militant brigade.

Credibility issue to your protestation here as you must read the posts and know full well that there is a large contingent of marauding atheists that just love to devour fresh believers and agnostics.

Yes I support evolution. Beyond that you don't know what my beliefs are

Yes I do, you hate God and think he is responsible for many of the horrors that go on in the world through bad examples laid out in the Bible.

That wasn't God my friend, that was people, it was people who wrote the Bible, It was people who committed atrocities. It is also people who will learn from that, both victim and perpetrator.

God is not who or what you think he/she, it is.

God is everything, there is nothing that isn't God. There is no pleasure or pain that God does not know about or experience. God is omnipotent and omniscient.

You are free to do whatever you desire provided you afford the same freedom to everybody else. If you break that fundamental law you will experience that same breach of your freedom as you denied another, If you hurt someone you will feel that hurt, if you kill or rape someone, at some point in your journey you will be killed or raped.

You will experience every aspect of being both a man and a woman a rich person and a poor person, every race every creed. You have already come a very long way with much pain and much joy behind you and much yet to experience.

You see I know everything about you, in as much detail as I need to know at least.

Evolution Theory is an irritating distraction, it tell you nothing, it teaches you nothing. If you want to do something constructive go out and make some mistakes, or do something wonderful, that is your true purpose.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
In fact evolution itself is seen as nothing more than the study of what happened after a creation process brought about life. Atheists admit they don't know exactly how and cannot reproduce life, but have faith that it just happened without a creator.

*sigh*

Let's try this one last time. If you still can't get it, I'm just going to leave you to wallow in your arrogant ignorance.

You're stuck on this concept of "atheists say there's no god but they can't prove how life began so they're having faith that it was something other than god."

I've said it already in this thread, you pretend to be an authority on atheists but you don't have a clue.

1) Atheists say that there is no proof of god. There is also no proof of bigfoot, aliens, unicorns, fairies, leprechauns, or the loch ness monster but some people believe in those things. The biggest difference is that there isn't a "First Church of Sasquatch" that's threatening people with eternal damnation if they don't believe. Ironically, there's more evidence for bigfoot than there is for god.

2) It isn't a matter of faith. There is life on this planet. Life clearly had an origin. Currently, the evidence isn't clear exactly how it happened but it happened. Just because we don't know how it happened, doesn't mean that the gap gets filled in with a god. Intelligent people don't go around answering every difficult question with "god did it." Everything we know about math and science was discovered because "god did it" was not a suitable answer. Some people try to answer unexplained questions with "aliens did it" which is equally lazy. You seem to think that human beings have been studying this topic long enough to come up with an answer and that's laughable. We've made huge leaps in scientific understanding but we're still multiple generations away from a decent understanding of our own planet, much less the entire universe.

3) You're using the classic "god of the gaps" argument which is very dangerous from a Christian standpoint. Eventually, you'll run out of gaps and what will you have left on which to base your faith? Believe whatever you want to believe but don't try to argue against science and don't try to tell others what they believe. It just makes people dislike you and your whole religious ilk because it shows a level of irrationality and straw-grasping that reeks of ignorance and desperation.

How dare some God believer come along and steal my science argument.

The arrogance of evolution knows no bounds.
The scientists take the photosynthesis process and say.....it is the most inefficient because of the evolutionary path it took. The proteins in plants make up the most abundant source of protein on earth. Lets change that and make it efficient to save the planet, ignoring that plant protein is also the most abundant for other reasons, food. They actually want to decrease the protein of plants to make them more efficient in the name of global warming. Genetically engineered plants grown just to remove carbon from the air would take the place of livestock feed and food crops.

Source

They point to this photosynthesis, trapping the Carbon molecules, as proof there is no design because in their arrogance they see only the inefficiency ignoring the benefits to the ecosystem it provides. If plants were more efficient in carbon removal at the expense of massive reduction in plant proteins, where would that have left their evolutionary theories on animal life? They'd all still be crawling around on worm bellies.

They are taking what they think they know and playing God with it.
They are saying look at this wonderful billions of years of evolution we now understand.....lets change it.

Before they start changing our planet, they should be able to answer the most basic question instead of putting the cart before the horse. Demonstrate you understand life by making life. Changing photosynthesis on Earth is kind of a bid deal, especially if it goes against their vaunted evolution which according to science led to the form we have now.

You are the master of the red herring.

You somehow took my statements and turned them into a rant about genetic modification of plants?

You're hopeless.

originally posted by: kennyb72


Well it all depends really, an example would be, if you think you just die and that's the end to it, then you have no purpose, have you noticed yet how short life is?

What could possibly be your purpose other than self gratification. By that I mean everything you do, even if done for others, is just you experiencing your life and perhaps feeling fulfilled because you did a few good deeds, but ultimately that is self centric. You cannot get away from self if you believe that this is your only life.

If you understand that you are reborn time after time and that your deeds are subject to cause and affect then your life has purpose as a school for your spiritual being. So yes, if your fulfilment is self centric and derived from pleasing yourself, then your life is hollow and not truly fulfilling.

If you have to believe in god and heaven or reincarnation just to give meaning to your life, that's a very sad commentary on your life, not the rest of us.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

The point here is not that "God did it," the point here is depending on what the origin of life is evolutionary theory could be total bull#. If nothing about evolutionary theory works with the way life originated then it falls apart. Saying evolution is fact means one simply believes whatever cause life to originate will be on par with evolutionary theory.

Yeah, I know that's what you believe. That's exactly what several others in this thread have stated. You're just as wrong as they are which is why I lumped you in with the other creationists. None of you have presented an original argument.

Second if you want to know the BS behind evolution try taking a look at some of the archaeology work done by Michael Cremo.

Michael A. Cremo (born July 15, 1948), also known by his devotional name Drutakarmā dāsa, is an American freelance researcher who identifies himself as a Vedic creationist and an "alternative archaeologist" and argues that humans have lived on the earth for billions of years. In case of artifacts allegedly found in the Eocene auriferous gravels of Table Mountain, California and discussed in his book, Forbidden Archaeology, Cremo argues for the existence of modern man on Earth as long as 30 to 40 million years ago. Forbidden Archaeology, which he wrote with Richard L. Thompson, has attracted attention from mainstream scholars who have critiqued the views given on archaeology and consider it pseudoscientific.

Yeah, he seems credible...

I guess if you believe the bible, you'll believe any nonsense that helps support your opinion.

Good archaeology gets thrown under the rug simply because it disagrees with the most popular scientific paradigm. My issue with evolution is not that it would dis prove God. The two could easily co-exist. I disagree with the idea of speciation over billions of years due to random mutations and natural selection simply because I think its bogus.

Good archaeology? That's laughable.

You disagree with the idea simply because you think it's bogus. You think it's bogus because it goes against your worldview. Your biased opinion do not facts make.

Your entire argument about burden of proof was one of the most unintentionally ironic things I've ever read.

originally posted by: kennyb72


Yes I do, you hate God and think he is responsible for many of the horrors that go on in the world through bad examples laid out in the Bible.

How exactly can someone A) hate something they don't believe exists and B) blame that something that doesn't exist for anything that happens?

Why do Christians claim that Atheists "hate god"? I've seen that from several Christians on this forum and it's a ridiculous statement.

Do Atheists severely dislike bible-thumping religious nuts who try to force the rest of the world to live by their rules? Absolutely but that has nothing to do with god and everything to do with assholes.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
In fact evolution itself is seen as nothing more than the study of what happened after a creation process brought about life. Atheists admit they don't know exactly how and cannot reproduce life, but have faith that it just happened without a creator.

*sigh*

Let's try this one last time. If you still can't get it, I'm just going to leave you to wallow in your arrogant ignorance.

You're stuck on this concept of "atheists say there's no god but they can't prove how life began so they're having faith that it was something other than god."

I've said it already in this thread, you pretend to be an authority on atheists but you don't have a clue.

1) Atheists say that there is no proof of god. There is also no proof of bigfoot, aliens, unicorns, fairies, leprechauns, or the loch ness monster but some people believe in those things. The biggest difference is that there isn't a "First Church of Sasquatch" that's threatening people with eternal damnation if they don't believe. Ironically, there's more evidence for bigfoot than there is for god.

2) It isn't a matter of faith. There is life on this planet. Life clearly had an origin. Currently, the evidence isn't clear exactly how it happened but it happened. Just because we don't know how it happened, doesn't mean that the gap gets filled in with a god. Intelligent people don't go around answering every difficult question with "god did it." Everything we know about math and science was discovered because "god did it" was not a suitable answer. Some people try to answer unexplained questions with "aliens did it" which is equally lazy. You seem to think that human beings have been studying this topic long enough to come up with an answer and that's laughable. We've made huge leaps in scientific understanding but we're still multiple generations away from a decent understanding of our own planet, much less the entire universe.

3) You're using the classic "god of the gaps" argument which is very dangerous from a Christian standpoint. Eventually, you'll run out of gaps and what will you have left on which to base your faith? Believe whatever you want to believe but don't try to argue against science and don't try to tell others what they believe. It just makes people dislike you and your whole religious ilk because it shows a level of irrationality and straw-grasping that reeks of ignorance and desperation.

How dare some God believer come along and steal my science argument.

The arrogance of evolution knows no bounds.
The scientists take the photosynthesis process and say.....it is the most inefficient because of the evolutionary path it took. The proteins in plants make up the most abundant source of protein on earth. Lets change that and make it efficient to save the planet, ignoring that plant protein is also the most abundant for other reasons, food. They actually want to decrease the protein of plants to make them more efficient in the name of global warming. Genetically engineered plants grown just to remove carbon from the air would take the place of livestock feed and food crops.

Source

They point to this photosynthesis, trapping the Carbon molecules, as proof there is no design because in their arrogance they see only the inefficiency ignoring the benefits to the ecosystem it provides. If plants were more efficient in carbon removal at the expense of massive reduction in plant proteins, where would that have left their evolutionary theories on animal life? They'd all still be crawling around on worm bellies.

They are taking what they think they know and playing God with it.
They are saying look at this wonderful billions of years of evolution we now understand.....lets change it.

Before they start changing our planet, they should be able to answer the most basic question instead of putting the cart before the horse. Demonstrate you understand life by making life. Changing photosynthesis on Earth is kind of a bid deal, especially if it goes against their vaunted evolution which according to science led to the form we have now.

You are the master of the red herring.

You somehow took my statements and turned them into a rant about genetic modification of plants?

You're hopeless.

Oh I see you like how I tied your rant into answering the question posed by the title of this thread,

The Questions That Abiogenesis Needs To Answer, Before Evolution.

Evolution theory has empowered these pompous asses into thinking they can tinker with the fundamental building blocks of life itself on this planet. They are not just saying, look here what we can teach about the past, they are trying to trump the evolutionary timeline and bugger the whole thing up. Bet you are proud of that.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

They didn't need the theory of evolution to tinker or feel that they have the right to do so.

Honestly I don't see why A has to be answered before E. Seems to me just another failed attempt at ... I don't even know what the OP was going for.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: TinfoilTP

They didn't need the theory of evolution to tinker or feel that they have the right to do so.

Honestly I don't see why A has to be answered before E. Seems to me just another failed attempt at ... I don't even know what the OP was going for.

Oh yeah?

Here is a quote from one of your religious patrons on evolution.

Details of the past also hold explanatory power in biology. Plants obtain their carbon by joining carbon dioxide gas to an organic molecule within their cells. This is called carbon fixation. The enzyme that fixes carbon is RuBP carboxlyase. Plants using C3 photosynthesis lose 1/3 to 1/2 of the carbon dioxide they originally fix. RuBP carboxlyase works well in the absence of oxygen, but poorly in its presence. This is because photosynthesis evolved when there was little gaseous oxygen present. Later, when oxygen became more abundant, the efficiency of photosynthesis decreased. Photosynthetic organisms compensated by making more of the enzyme. RuBP carboxylase is the most abundant protein on the planet partially because it is one of the least efficient.

Source

Details of the past hold explanatory power.....let that sink in. That is saying evolution is empowering science.

Oh and this one is a classic,

Diversity appears to have hit an all-time high just prior to the appearance of humans. As the human population has increased, biological diversity has decreased at an ever-increasing pace. The correlation is probably causal.

Let's let these morally deficient evolution empowered scientists apply their logic to that one......genocide will be seen as a biological function of nature.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Meh, one persons opinion. Breeding of plants and animals was being done long before the TOE. They didn't need it then and I'm sure they would have progressed in that area even if the Darwin had never published his TOE.

Genocide? Really?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Meh, one persons opinion. Breeding of plants and animals was being done long before the TOE. They didn't need it then and I'm sure they would have progressed in that area even if the Darwin had never published his TOE.

Genocide? Really?

They are already scheming to remove the carbon in the atmosphere at the expense of the food supply. Why? Because they probably figure the population on Earth is artificially too high from man using science to industrialize and make advances in medicine and agriculture. Super Atheist to the rescue armed with amazing evolutionary empowerment.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

So?

Aren't you a christian? According to your beliefs, doesn't humanity get wiped out in the end anyway?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: TinfoilTP

So?

Aren't you a christian? According to your beliefs, doesn't humanity get wiped out in the end anyway?

Oh well in that case we should all go park on a railroad track.
Your indifference proves my point, morally bankrupt is a trait easily grasped.