Life

[jillian]

How do you think life started on earth. Science has proved "the big bang theory couldn't have started it, darwinism only starts after it has begun. They've proved it impossible to have just evolved on it on. Something to ponder on.

honey, science "proved" no such thing.

again, why the consternation about what others to believe?

i've never understood that kind of mindset.

scientist have tried to recreate every ideal evolusunist have come up with with failure as the result.

which means they couldn't duplicate the conditions that led to the big bang, not that it didn't occur. big bang and evolution are two separate concepts, though. you can't use the terms interchangeably.

you really need to stop confusing relgion and science. there is a place for both, but they aren't the same and you can't continue to try to blur the lines between them to meet some religious agenda.

and you still haven't said why you give a rat's patoot what other people believe.

 

[Caligirl]

The truth is: neither science nor religion has any ability to conclusively "prove" that life was "created" by a higher entity or by the infinitessimally small chance of mere happenstance.

Some people like to claim that they are far too rational to accept a magical notion of a "creator." They mock and deride anybody with a faith-based belief. But when it comes to the almost infinitely small chance of life being created out of some random connection of chemical accidents, a belief in science also involves magical thinking.

infiitesimally small ... well consider that there was hundreds of billions of years for that lightning strike (or whatever the spark was) to occur, and "infinitesimal" starts to sound like maybe the wrong way to think about it.

As far as chemical contents - the human body (and most life) is made of chemicals in roughly the same proportions as they exist in interstellar dust, stars, and etc. If life occured 'by chance' then the fact that hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc is in life in the same proportion as in any chunk of space, well it just seems to add up.

I mean, God could have made us out of really cool stuff instead of the odd parts he found laying about the garage.

 

[Liability]

The truth is: neither science nor religion has any ability to conclusively "prove" that life was "created" by a higher entity or by the infinitessimally small chance of mere happenstance.

Some people like to claim that they are far too rational to accept a magical notion of a "creator." They mock and deride anybody with a faith-based belief. But when it comes to the almost infinitely small chance of life being created out of some random connection of chemical accidents, a belief in science also involves magical thinking.

infiitesimally small ... well consider that there was hundreds of billions of years for that lightning strike (or whatever the spark was) to occur, and "infinitesimal" starts to sound like maybe the wrong way to think about it.

As far as chemical contents - the human body (and most life) is made of chemicals in roughly the same proportions as they exist in interstellar dust, stars, and etc. If life occured 'by chance' then the fact that hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc is in life in the same proportion as in any chunk of space, well it just seems to add up.

I mean, God could have made us out of really cool stuff instead of the odd parts he found laying about the garage.

1 chance in a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion (give or take a few trillion) doesn't make the odds all that much better even over a few billion years.

My personal inclination is that God did it. And He can improve any odds He chooses and create the material needed to give a jump start to evolution out of ANYTHING He wishes.

But, that's just my inclination. I do not claim to "know." And I find no fault with whatever anybody else is inclined to believe or accept.

 

[Smartt33]

God created life on Earth. How exactly? Science hasn't figured that out yet.

He spoke most of it into being. However in the case of humans He formed every detail.
His creation was not a scientific event, it was a God event. Science will never come close to explaining it.

 

[froggy]

The truth is: neither science nor religion has any ability to conclusively "prove" that life was "created" by a higher entity or by the infinitessimally small chance of mere happenstance.

Some people like to claim that they are far too rational to accept a magical notion of a "creator." They mock and deride anybody with a faith-based belief. But when it comes to the almost infinitely small chance of life being created out of some random connection of chemical accidents, a belief in science also involves magical thinking.

infiitesimally small ... well consider that there was hundreds of billions of years for that lightning strike (or whatever the spark was) to occur, and "infinitesimal" starts to sound like maybe the wrong way to think about it.

As far as chemical contents - the human body (and most life) is made of chemicals in roughly the same proportions as they exist in interstellar dust, stars, and etc. If life occured 'by chance' then the fact that hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc is in life in the same proportion as in any chunk of space, well it just seems to add up.

I mean, God could have made us out of really cool stuff instead of the odd parts he found laying about the garage.

So you admit the human body is made up of dust, so does the bible.

 

[Liability]

The truth is: neither science nor religion has any ability to conclusively "prove" that life was "created" by a higher entity or by the infinitessimally small chance of mere happenstance.

Some people like to claim that they are far too rational to accept a magical notion of a "creator." They mock and deride anybody with a faith-based belief. But when it comes to the almost infinitely small chance of life being created out of some random connection of chemical accidents, a belief in science also involves magical thinking.

infiitesimally small ... well consider that there was hundreds of billions of years for that lightning strike (or whatever the spark was) to occur, and "infinitesimal" starts to sound like maybe the wrong way to think about it.

As far as chemical contents - the human body (and most life) is made of chemicals in roughly the same proportions as they exist in interstellar dust, stars, and etc. If life occured 'by chance' then the fact that hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc is in life in the same proportion as in any chunk of space, well it just seems to add up.

I mean, God could have made us out of really cool stuff instead of the odd parts he found laying about the garage.

So you admit the human body is made up of dust, so does the bible.

Nope. I "admitted" no such thing. I didn't even say, suggest or imply any such thing.

However, I have no problem acknowledging that the material ultimately used to begin the process of making "life" could have been the same "stuff" we call interstellar "dust."

What I SAID was that I don't know. And whether or not you recognize it, the FACT is that you don't "know" either.

 

[midcan5]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osXDyXzFor0[/ame]

 

[☭proletarian☭]

How do you think life started on earth. Science has proved "the big bang theory couldn't have started it, darwinism only starts after it has begun. They've proved it impossible to have just evolved on it on. Something to ponder on.

*patpat*

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Humans are the result of an alien high school kids science project.

.

Not far off from the original creation stories upon which the Jewish texts are based, actually. Annunaki, they who from the heavens came.

 

[uscitizen]

All hail J.

 

[Caligirl]

The truth is: neither science nor religion has any ability to conclusively "prove" that life was "created" by a higher entity or by the infinitessimally small chance of mere happenstance.

Some people like to claim that they are far too rational to accept a magical notion of a "creator." They mock and deride anybody with a faith-based belief. But when it comes to the almost infinitely small chance of life being created out of some random connection of chemical accidents, a belief in science also involves magical thinking.

infiitesimally small ... well consider that there was hundreds of billions of years for that lightning strike (or whatever the spark was) to occur, and "infinitesimal" starts to sound like maybe the wrong way to think about it.

As far as chemical contents - the human body (and most life) is made of chemicals in roughly the same proportions as they exist in interstellar dust, stars, and etc. If life occured 'by chance' then the fact that hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc is in life in the same proportion as in any chunk of space, well it just seems to add up.

I mean, God could have made us out of really cool stuff instead of the odd parts he found laying about the garage.

So you admit the human body is made up of dust, so does the bible.

Sure. I don't see your point. You seem to be tilting at windmills.

 

[amrchaos]

How do you think life started on earth. Science has proved "the big bang theory couldn't have started it, darwinism only starts after it has begun. They've proved it impossible to have just evolved on it on. Something to ponder on.

You know, we have found bacteria on rocks and asteroids that orbits/crashed on the earth.

Did God "put" life on those chunks of rocks? Something to ponder as well, hmmmm?

 

[amrchaos]

How do you think life started on earth. Science has proved "the big bang theory couldn't have started it, darwinism only starts after it has begun. They've proved it impossible to have just evolved on it on. Something to ponder on.

honey, science "proved" no such thing.

again, why the consternation about what others to believe?

i've never understood that kind of mindset.

It is more like Froggy is saying that "The Big Bang theory does not explain how life was started". Which is true.

Also, Darwinism tells us that life will try to adapt to its surrondings in order to survive--again Darwinism does not explain how life actually starts but leads us to some interesting Hypothesis on the concept(all theoretical with experiments on the way to see if any holds water)

Finally, Science has a problem with defing what life actually is. Not quite nailed down as of yet.

Unfortunately, this only highlights the problems science faces as it marches with sure footing towards the future. Notice that answering such questions put theology in a great bind. Bind them, dear science, bind them. I have more faith in the more questionable medical techniques of science than the surest get health through prayer methods of Theology anyday!!

Bind the theologians and push their make believe into the light, dear science. Man has cowered under the ignorance of belief systems that blind tem for far too long.

March forth brave science--the theologians seeks to bring questions about you--but Science NEEDS unanswered questions and invites them willingly. What questions does religon invites--none because questions rout the faith!!

Which is what I think Froggy is trying to say.