JackC 0 #76 August 24, 2006 Quote... science has proven abiogenesis impossible so life was created ....could that be a start ? Where did you hear this? As far as I know, abiogenesis is still very much a possible and plausible theory. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #77 August 24, 2006 >... science has proven abiogenesis impossible so life was >created ....could that be a start ? Nope. Abiogenesis is provably possible statistically. The arguments nowadays center around how likely the various possibilities are. We are almost certainly the result of one of the more likely scenarios. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #78 August 24, 2006 >but I looked it up, and your idea that all of life could start from one > single strand of RNA is called a hypothesis. In other words, wishful > thinking. I didn't say all life could start from it. I said that a single strand of RNA can reproduce itself. Since this has been proven in a lab, it's far from wishful thinking. >Do we find this single strand of RNA laying in the driveway, or does it >only exist within an existing lifeform? You might find an RNA precursor in a subsea volcanic vent, where all the raw materials (and energy to combine them) are present. Replicating RNA almost certainly wasn't the first step; monomer and oligomer synthesis came well before that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skysaintj 0 #79 August 25, 2006 Quote>... science has proven abiogenesis impossible so life was >created ....could that be a start ? Nope. Abiogenesis is provably possible statistically. ____________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>Can you maybe send me a link ? Thx _______________________________________________ The arguments nowadays center around how likely the various possibilities are. We are almost certainly the result of one of the more likely scenarios. Read this ? Theories abound, but no direct evidence for the beginning of the theoretical evolutionary climb of life up what Richard Dawkins and many evolutionists call “mount improbable” ever has been discovered (Dawkins, 1996). Nor have researchers been able to develop a plausible theory to explain how life could evolve from non-life. Many equally implausible theories now exist, most of which are based primarily on speculation. Nearly all biologists were convinced by the latter half of the nineteenth century that spontaneous generation of all types of living organisms was impossible (Bergman, 1993a). Now that naturalism dominates science, Darwinists reason that at least one spontaneous generation of life event must have occurred in the distant past because no other naturalistic origin-of-life method exists aside from panspermia, which only moves the spontaneous generation of life event elsewhere (Bergman, 1993b). As theism was filtered out of science, spontaneous generation gradually was resurrected in spite of its previous defeat. The solution was to add a large amount of time to the broth.. Read more @ http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.aspIf at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skysaintj 0 #80 August 25, 2006 Read @ >> http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp do you have any links ? Thx If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #81 August 25, 2006 Quote(Dawkins, 1996) Do you have the full reference for this?Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #82 August 25, 2006 Quote Read @ >> http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp do you have any links ? Thx Wow, you cite a reference who's primary quoted belief is: The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. That is one staggeringly unnbiased site you've got there. You really should get your science from genuine science sources. That way you could criticise the science for what is actually is. Perhaps you'd like to read some of these: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/73501648/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 http://www.springerlink.com/content/t1n325268n01217k/ http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #83 August 25, 2006 QuoteQuote What about microbes on meteorites found in Antarctica? Only the most circumspect evidence of microbial fossils exists in Mars Rock ALH-84001, and no positive proof. edit for boo-boo in posting mh new results: www.theage.com.au/news/world/meteorite-find-suggests-life-on-mars/2006/08/24/1156012674139.html... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #84 August 26, 2006 I LOVE this stuff! But I'm a voyeour. We'll find out some really interesting stuff when they untangle our DNA. I'll wait till then. If they fing Cro-magnon man in my DNA I'll accept evolution. If they don't, I'll be very interested in the debate! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #85 August 26, 2006 Quote If they fing Cro-magnon man in my DNA... I think that's already well established.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #86 August 28, 2006 >Theories abound, but no direct evidence for the beginning of >the theoretical evolutionary climb of life up what Richard Dawkins >and many evolutionists call “mount improbable” ever has been >discovered (Dawkins, 1996). Yep; he wrote a book by that name. It turns out that there's a back way up that mountain that's very flat, but extends a very long distance - and there are lots of easy ways up. It's what the book's all about, if you're interested. >Darwinists reason that at least one spontaneous generation of >life event must have occurred in the distant past . . . Dozens, actually. If you want one specific place to claim "life began" then you have to define "life" very carefully. Does it mean the ability to reproduce? Then crystals are alive. Does it mean the ability to reproduce and adapt to its environment? Then computer viruses are alive. Does it mean the ability to reproduce sexually? Then bacteria, algae etc are _not_ alive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #87 August 28, 2006 >If they fing Cro-magnon man in my DNA I'll accept evolution. --------------------- From Nat Geo: Around 50,000 years ago, small groups of anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa and began to colonize the rest of the world. Known as Cro-Magnons for the site in France where the earliest remains were found, these early humans co-existed with the Neandertals then living in Europe until the Neandertals became extinct roughly 30,000 years ago. . . . A team of geneticists from Italy and Spain compared the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of two Cro-Magnons that were 23,000 and 25,000 years old respectively, four Neandertal specimens, 29,000 to 42,000 years old, and a large database of modern human mtDNA to shed some light on the issue. The authors found that the Cro-Magnon mtDNA fit well within the spectrum of genetic variation exhibited by modern Europeans, but differed sharply from that of the Neandertals. They conclude that it is unlikely that Neandertals contributed to the current European gene pool. ------------------------ Translation - Cro-Magnon man's DNA is about as different from yours as mine is from yours. If you saw one on the drop zone you wouldn't be able to tell him apart from anyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #88 August 28, 2006 QuoteTranslation - Cro-Magnon man's DNA is about as different from yours as mine is from yours. If you saw one on the drop zone you wouldn't be able to tell him apart from anyone else.Unless they were doing a Geico commercial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #89 August 28, 2006 Interesting things can happen with your DNA. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #90 August 28, 2006 Quote Interesting things can happen with your DNA. Very scary that some places are requiring even traffic infractions to provide DNA. There's going to be mistakes made, and they're going to be painful for those involved.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #91 August 28, 2006 Quote 1. Common genomes. All life evolved from common ancestors; therefore they all share the same mechanism whereby their basic phenotype (and the changes accured through the evolutionary process) are stored and passed on to the next generation. The genetic code is based on four basic nucleotide pairs within the DNA molecule; these are organized into triplets that encode for protein synthesis. Indeed, the coding is remarkably similar, with only minor variations even between phyla. Genetically, the humans are remarkably similar to chimpanzee. Why do humans wonder and the chimpanzee’s don't? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #92 August 28, 2006 Quote Genetically, the humans are remarkably similar to chimpanzee. Why do humans wonder and the chimpanzee’s don't? Chimpanzees have been wondering that for decades now.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #93 August 28, 2006 >Why do humans wonder and the chimpanzee’s don't? Give em 500,000 years. They'll invent the Primate Internet to send porn, start sending spam to everyone and develop eating disorders just like us. (But they will wonder where all the oil went, and why it's so hot out . . .) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #94 August 28, 2006 Quote>Why do humans wonder and the chimpanzee’s don't? Give em 500,000 years. They'll invent the Primate Internet to send porn, start sending spam to everyone and develop eating disorders just like us. (But they will wonder where all the oil went, and why it's so hot out . . .) Great . . . then Moses shows up and says, "Get your hands off me you damned dirty apes!"quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #95 August 28, 2006 Quote Chimpanzees have been wondering that for decades now. Do you have any solid evidence to support this? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davedlg 0 #96 August 28, 2006 "God made all of this evidence contridicting the bible to test our faith. " That's the line that I got from a creationalist that left me walking away dumbfounded, unable to continue the debate against. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #97 August 29, 2006 QuoteQuote Chimpanzees have been wondering that for decades now. Do you have any solid evidence to support this? You just need to visit your local zoo and watch. We are clearly a source of wonder to them. Just ask the gorillas.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #98 August 29, 2006 QuoteJust ask the gorillas. Oh believe me, I've asked. All I got back was, "Koko, happy red banana kitten."quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)