the shape of proteins requires an engineer

originally posted by: cooperton

I was referring to the thermodynamics of protein monomer polymerization being a non-spontaneous reaction in water. This means that according to Thermodynamics, synthesizing protein or DNA monomers in water is equivalent to lighting a match underwater.

Does it need to be water? What was the initial makeup of the universe? It seems there is evidence of alien life on meteorites that have most likely never been in the water, so once again you are trying to stay very narrow in your choice of observations.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

Does it need to be water? What was the initial makeup of the universe? It seems there is evidence of alien life on meteorites that have most likely never been in the water, so once again you are trying to stay very narrow in your choice of observations.

Find a living cell that can live without water and we can ponder that idea.

originally posted by: cooperton

Find a living cell that can live without water and we can ponder that idea.

Need to think about how the building blocks of life get on a meteor... as a start.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

Need to think about how the building blocks of life get on a meteor... as a start.

The meteorite samples could have been contaminated upon impact with earth. There's even amino acids in our atmosphere. Regardless, Amino acids can survive without water, cells cannot

originally posted by: cooperton
The meteorite samples could have been contaminated upon impact with earth. There's even amino acids in our atmosphere. Regardless, Amino acids can survive without water, cells cannot

It is actually inside the rock.... not on the outside.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

It is actually inside the rock.... not on the outside.

Link to it being inside the meteorite?

It doesn't even matter, amino acids can survive without water, living cells cannot...

...which goes back to the original point that the first theoretical cell of abiogenesis would have to be in an aqueous solution (water). The difficulty of this is that protein and DNA/RNA chains spontaneously break down in water. For this reason, amino acid (protein) polymerization is equivalent to light a match underwater.

originally posted by: cooperton

...which goes back to the original point that the first theoretical cell of abiogenesis would have to be in an aqueous solution (water). The difficulty of this is that protein and DNA/RNA chains spontaneously break down in water. For this reason, amino acid (protein) polymerization is equivalent to light a match underwater.

The difference between you and me is you always talk in absolutes, and I don't. I don't say "there is no God", I say it is a non-falsifiability statement. You say if you plop DNA in water it breaks down, and I agree, but then I say look in the direction of cyclic nucleotides that can merge together in water and form polymers. I'm looking for the answers and you are just looking for God.

The reason for how you look at all this is you don't even believe that the spark of life was created by God at all. If you thought that then you would then need to think there was a process of life to form over billions of years. We call that evolution, but you believe life spontaneously happened in its current forms, so I'm not sure why you even try to debate the origins of life and just say God created it in whatever current form it is today and then be done with the topic.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

The difference between you and me is you always talk in absolutes, and I don't. I don't say "there is no God", I say it is a non-falsifiability statement. You say if you plop DNA in water it breaks down, and I agree, but then I say look in the direction of cyclic nucleotides that can merge together in water and form polymers. I'm looking for the answers and you are just looking for God.

The reason for how you look at all this is you don't even believe that the spark of life was created by God at all. If you thought that then you would then need to think there was a process of life to form over billions of years. We call that evolution, but you believe life spontaneously happened in its current forms, so I'm not sure why you even try to debate the origins of life and just say God created it in whatever current form it is today and then be done with the topic.

There are many people who believe evolution and abiogenesis are responsible for life, but the evidence points to the contrary. I speak in absolutes sometimes because there are absolutely absolutes in the world of science. Barring miracles from the creator of these physical laws. But ordinarily there are indeed repeatable, observable facts that cannot be defied. You are ok with defying thermodynamics to fit your narrative. When I see thermodynamics defied I know that it is the Creator of the laws that permits it, walking on water and so forth. I point out thermodynamic facts and you plea that it must be different solely so you can maintain your belief in evolution. You are pleading for more miracles to suit your narrative than there are in the Bible.

Abiogenesis pleas for thermodynamics to be backwards. It requires the same set of laws that would make time run backwards, or a skeleton to become a living human. It is such an integral part of our physical world that would need to be defied in order to appease some stupid mutant pond scum theory. I use the word 'stupid' here in a meaningful way. It is a dumb process you are appealing for. How intelligent humans could argue for such an unintelligent theory baffles me.

originally posted by: cooperton
absolutely absolutes in the world of science.

Rarer than you think, and it seems the majority of people that are a hell of a lot smarter and skilled than you and I would disagree with much of your absolutes too. Not having an answer yet does not create an absolute.

I use the word 'stupid' here in a meaningful way. It is a dumb process you are appealing for. How intelligent humans could argue for such an unintelligent theory baffles me.

What law of thermodynamics allows for the spontaneous creation of life from nothing? The problem with your argument is you are reaching outside of our universe for the answers. A part of those answers is a never-ending path of "God made it that way". Why does the universe look to be 14 billion years old, because wanted it to look 14 billion years old, rinse and repeat over and over.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

What law of thermodynamics allows for the spontaneous creation of life from nothing?

Whoever created the law can change the law as needed.

The problem with your argument is you are reaching outside of our universe for the answers.

Not out of our universe, I am reaching to higher dimensions to explain the lower dimensions

A part of those answers is a never-ending path of "God made it that way". Why does the universe look to be 14 billion years old, because wanted it to look 14 billion years old, rinse and repeat over and over.

This is under the assumption that the speed of light is the same in both directions, but this is an assumption that can't be proven and it very well could be instantaneous in one direction



There is also a very remarkable discrepancy of observation and theory with the universe. Dark matter was added to the equation in order to make it work beyond our solar system. This to me says that something is deeply incorrect about our understanding of the universe. When observing things this far away there are a lot of assumptions.

Mr. Pond Scum spends a lot of time pulling rabbits out of hats. No explanation, no content. It's the guy in the sky. That's all you need to know.

The shape of proteins does not "require" an engineer. It just means nature is smarter than you are. Your ignorance does not prove God.

originally posted by: schuyler
The shape of proteins does not "require" an engineer. It just means nature is smarter than you are. Your ignorance does not prove God.

Or takes zero smarts, because it would need to be something anyways. Like I said before if you picked a number between 1 and a zillion and I guessed it that is how creationists see it all, but the fact is more like I ask you to pick any number between 1 and a zillion and it is the correct no matter what number you picked, that is closer to how evolution works.

originally posted by: schuyler
The shape of proteins does not "require" an engineer. It just means nature is smarter than you are. Your ignorance does not prove God.

Nature is smart? You're implying intelligent design.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

Or takes zero smarts, because it would need to be something anyways.

Too late to cover his incidental admission of the obvious intelligence involved in nature.

originally posted by: Phantom423
Mr. Pond Scum spends a lot of time pulling rabbits out of hats. No explanation, no content. It's the guy in the sky. That's all you need to know.

Oh look who returned, the one who supposedly is not engaging with me:

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton

P.S. I'm not engaging with you in any conversation.

it seems like everything you say turns out to be false.

The reason phantom does fly-by attempts at insults with horrible memes is because they're incapable of debating me without resorting to ad-hominem. I am proud of them for finally posting a meme without a watermark on it. Your watermarked memes are symbolic of your lack of originality. A real phantom special.

Edit: remember when you posted that research article describing a hypothetical measuring device the size of a planet and you thought it was a real experiment?

a reply to: cooperton

When will people understand what is actually worth their time, what actually has some value in their lives, what is possible, what they can do instead of doing nothing?

When will they open their eyes and see the reality, the beauty in the science itself.

Curiously, wanting answers to everything, one could imagine according to their knowledge how everything works, it flashes in their heads, how molecules move, behave, how light works, how sound travels, how the force is applied and moved, how species live and adapt, how this complicated structure built known as humans works...

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: cooperton

When will people understand what is actually worth their time, what actually has some value in their lives, what is possible, what they can do instead of doing nothing?

When will they open their eyes and see the reality, the beauty in the science itself.

Curiously, wanting answers to everything, one could imagine according to their knowledge how everything works, it flashes in their heads, how molecules move, behave, how light works, how sound travels, how the force is applied and moved, how species live and adapt, how this complicated structure built known as humans works...

800,000 miles of neural circuitry compacted into our skulls to allow self-awareness and the many beautiful faculties of the mind. Marvelous feat of engineering or dumb luck?

a reply to: cooperton

You're a liar and a fraud. You belong to a cult of idiots and scammers.
And you forget: I KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

Maybe it's about time everyone else knows too..........

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton

You're a liar and a fraud. You belong to a cult of idiots and scammers.
And you forget: I KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

Maybe it's about time everyone else knows too..........

You are seriously getting mentally ill over this. I don't even belong to any church so it is clear you have no idea who I actually am. You are literally wrong about everything.

originally posted by: schuyler
The shape of proteins does not "require" an engineer. It just means nature is smarter than you are. Your ignorance does not prove God.

... In effect, those who deny the purposeful intervention of a Creator attribute godlike powers to mindless molecules and natural forces. ...

Or nature itself, such as attributing intelligence to nature itself, or the ability and power to create/engineer, basically treating nature as a god, Mother Nature (Gaia, as the Greeks who popularized evolutionary philosophies and pantheism along with their Gaia/Mother Nature-worship would say as they claimed 'nature did it', regarding questions about the origin of life, the universe or the earth).

Source: Which Approach Is More Reasonable? (Awake!—2011)

Maybe some Mother Nature worshippers should just come out of the closet and stop beating around the bush. Like the one holding up the sign at 7:38 below: