It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
If the totality of the concept of evolution requires so many different biological theories, how is that superior to the theory of intelligent design?.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
If the totality of the concept of evolution requires so many different biological theories, how is that superior to the theory of intelligent design?.
It's superior because it explains complex events scientifically.
"Intelligent design" is not a theory and explains nothing. Unless you believe that "Magic Man done it!" is a suitable explanation.
For how can non-life create life? Please explain?
On the other hand there's intelligence in all Creation, which according to scientific fact - intelligence require a mind, a mind, a body - an entity: an Intelligent Creator.
Originally posted by edmc^2
this is nonsense because we all "poof" from nothing millions of millions of years ago thru some cosmic random/nonrandom unguided process called (the god of) CHANCE.
Originally posted by PieKeeper
Originally posted by edmc^2
this is nonsense because we all "poof" from nothing millions of millions of years ago thru some cosmic random/nonrandom unguided process called (the god of) CHANCE.
We actually know for a fact that random mutation occurs. I don't understand what you're trying to argue here, other than blatantly denying the evidence.
Originally posted by edmc^2
To the contrary, using your logic or illogic - abiogenesis explains complex events - magically.
For how can non-life create life? Please explain?
On the other hand there's intelligence in all Creation, which according to scientific fact - intelligence require a mind, a mind, a body - an entity: an Intelligent Creator.
Of course to evolutionists - this is nonsense because we all "poof" from nothing millions of millions of years ago thru some cosmic random/nonrandom unguided process called (the god of) CHANCE.
...For how can non-life create life? Please explain?
Originally posted by uva3021
...calibrate as a template sufficient enough to replicate....
the first life forms were vomited into existence by a hungover magic space donkey.
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
the first life forms were vomited into existence by a hungover magic space donkey.
You know Madness childish hyperbole's add nothing to the discussion, just saying.
But even if we give you Abiogenesis as being an unknown and not part of Evolution we are still only at that one little prokaryote. The enormity of the gap between that ONE prokaryote to TWO humans is illustrated below.
From This
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b5413f9dd6e4.png[/atsimg]
To This
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6d7157dd163f.jpg[/atsimg]
I am a very logical person, doesn't anybody else see what's wrong with this?
edit on 27-1-2011 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)
For how can non-life create life? Please explain?
Of course to evolutionists - this is nonsense because we all "poof" from nothing millions of millions of years ago thru some cosmic random/nonrandom unguided process called (the god of) CHANCE.
Originally posted by tgidkp
reply to post by edmc^2
... For how can non-life create life? Please explain?
life can only come from life?
it is a difficult question to disagree with, but i am going to go with "no".
i read a very compelling article recently (i will find a link if you wish) which argued that life must necessarily have arisen completely spontaneously. conversely, if a living form were ever created, then its livingness would be fundamentally a condition of its creators life. this creates an infinite regression.
take a computer, for example. if somehow by some miracle of technology we are able to generate computer software that is "self-aware", it still probably wouldnt be alive. this is simply because its living-ness would be a sub-set of our own human livingness.
the more-simple and less-obvious answer is that "it just did". no how. no why. no explanation needed.
from a personal perspective it makes sense simply because one of the most pronounced aspects of my own conscious activity is that it seems to be totally spontaneous.
so my final answer is: life came from no-life. there i said it.
yes, this is a repost. i answered this question, posed by you, in another thread. did you ignore me on purpose?
“As of 2010, no one has yet synthesized a "protocell" using basic components which would have the necessary properties of life (the so-called "bottom-up-approach"). Without such a proof-of-principle, explanations have tended to be short on specifics. However, some researchers are working in this field, notably Steen Rasmussen at Los Alamos National Laboratory and Jack Szostak at Harvard University. Others have argued that a "top-down approach" is more feasible. ..... – snipit from wiki link provided below.
I love the way you strawman abiogenesis here and say "poof"... I love it when Creationists use the word poof and make fun of Evolution and Abiogenesis by claiming it sounds as if it happened by magic. How exactly would that be a valid criticism of abiogenesis when your own position advocates that creation was by magic? Obviously you're being purposefully deceitful here as you know very well that abiogenesis does not involve any "poofing" and actually involves gradual natural chemical processes. When your own hypothesis on the origin of life involves seven days, two naked people and a talking snake I don't think you're in a position to claim that science is the one invoking magic.
"By creating vesicles containing proto-genetic material (depicted in this computer graphic), researchers are trying to watch life pop into existence"
Basically happened to you already, and it only took 9 months. Imagine what 4.5 billion years of evolution could do
"By creating vesicles containing proto-genetic material (depicted in this computer graphic), researchers are trying to watch life pop into existence"