Real Science…Not Darwin

[Grumblenuts]

Now contrast abundant single cell life emerging from warm primordial soup given millions of years..

Easy peasy lemon squeezy!

 

[esalla]

Actually, continuing to simply pound the "Reply" button, thereby creating pointlessly monstrous threads within a thread, demonstrates that us "leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet" could never happen. We're far too stupid to accomplish anything half so stupid.

So there is no manned mars missions being planned

Lol you stay there with your meds

 

[Grumblenuts]

Actually, continuing to simply pound the "Reply" button, thereby creating pointlessly monstrous threads within a thread, demonstrates that us "leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet" could never happen. We're far too stupid to accomplish anything half so stupid.

So there is no manned mars missions being planned

Lol you stay there with your meds

You keep shifting your goal posts:

• "the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet"
• "the people who settle and begin farming on mars"
• "when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet"
• "we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet"

Now all it takes is apparently:

• "manned mars missions being planned"

Lol, funny farmer

 

[esalla]

Actually, continuing to simply pound the "Reply" button, thereby creating pointlessly monstrous threads within a thread, demonstrates that us "leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet" could never happen. We're far too stupid to accomplish anything half so stupid.

So there is no manned mars missions being planned

Lol you stay there with your meds

You keep shifting your goal posts:

• "the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet"
• "the people who settle and begin farming on mars"
• "when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet"
• "we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet"

Now all it takes is apparently:

• "manned mars missions being planned"

Lol, funny farmer

Glad you agree

Ps this is not football

 

[Grumblenuts]

Why a "dead planet"? Why not try growing your turnips on the Moon first?

 

[Grumblenuts]

this is not football

Moving the goalposts:

Example #2: Perhaps the most classic example of this fallacy is the argument for the existence of God. Due to the understanding of nature through science, many of the arguments that used to be used for God (or gods) were abandoned, only to be replaced with new ones, usually involving questions to which science has not definitively answered yet. The move from creationism to intelligent design is a prime example. Currently the origin of life is a popular argument for God (although a classic argument from ignorance), and an area where we very well may have a scientific answer in the next decade, at which time, the “origin of life” argument will fade away and be replaced by another, thus moving the figurative goalposts farther back as our understanding of the natural world increases.

 

[esalla]

this is not football

Moving the goalposts:

Example #2: Perhaps the most classic example of this fallacy is the argument for the existence of God. Due to the understanding of nature through science, many of the arguments that used to be used for God (or gods) were abandoned, only to be replaced with new ones, usually involving questions to which science has not definitively answered yet. The move from creationism to intelligent design is a prime example. Currently the origin of life is a popular argument for God (although a classic argument from ignorance), and an area where we very well may have a scientific answer in the next decade, at which time, the “origin of life” argument will fade away and be replaced by another, thus moving the figurative goalposts farther back as our understanding of the natural world increases.

There are no goals kid, but you keep deluding yourself

 

[esalla]

Why a "dead planet"? Why not try growing your turnips on the Moon first?

The moon is not a planet, mars is a planet with oxygen and water

Next

 

[Grumblenuts]

There are no goals kid, but you keep deluding yourself

Whatever you say, funny farmer.

Why a "dead planet"? Why not try growing your turnips on the Moon first?

The moon is not a planet, mars is a planet with oxygen and water

Next

What does being a planet have to do with the price of tea in China?

The atmosphere of Mars consists of about 96% carbon dioxide, 1.93% argon and 1.89% nitrogen along with traces of oxygen and water.

Oxygen on the Moon
Based on lunar rock samples returned to Earth during the Apollo missions, scientists know that the moon's soil, or regolith, contains about 40 to 45 percent oxygen by weight. This makes oxygen the most abundant element on the moon's surface. But harvesting it is difficult.

Lunar water is water that is present on the Moon. Liquid water cannot persist at the Moon's surface, and water vapor is decomposed by sunlight, with hydrogen quickly lost to outer space. However, scientists have conjectured since the 1960s that water ice could survive in cold, permanently shadowed craters at the Moon's poles. Water molecules are also detected in the thin layer of gases above the lunar surface.

Next

 

[esalla]

There are no goals kid, but you keep deluding yourself

Whatever you say, funny farmer.

Why a "dead planet"? Why not try growing your turnips on the Moon first?

The moon is not a planet, mars is a planet with oxygen and water

Next

What does being a planet have to do with the price of tea in China?

The atmosphere of Mars consists of about 96% carbon dioxide, 1.93% argon and 1.89% nitrogen along with traces of oxygen and water.

Oxygen on the Moon
Based on lunar rock samples returned to Earth during the Apollo missions, scientists know that the moon's soil, or regolith, contains about 40 to 45 percent oxygen by weight. This makes oxygen the most abundant element on the moon's surface. But harvesting it is difficult.

Lunar water is water that is present on the Moon. Liquid water cannot persist at the Moon's surface, and water vapor is decomposed by sunlight, with hydrogen quickly lost to outer space. However, scientists have conjectured since the 1960s that water ice could survive in cold, permanently shadowed craters at the Moon's poles. Water molecules are also detected in the thin layer of gases above the lunar surface.

Next

The moon has no atmosphere silly

 

[Grumblenuts]

The moon has no atmosphere silly

Oh, is that a problem? The atmosphere on Mars is so much more inviting?

Atmosphere
Surface pressure	0.636 (0.4–0.87) kPa 0.00628 atm

Nothing comparable to Earth, sparky.. and cold!

 

[esalla]

The moon has no atmosphere silly

Oh, is that a problem? The atmosphere on Mars is so much more inviting?

Atmosphere
Surface pressure	0.636 (0.4–0.87) kPa 0.00628 atm

Nothing comparable to Earth, sparky.. and cold!

True there will be mars greenhouses

 

[Grumblenuts]

And we could build greenhouses on the Moon.. much more easily.
We've been to the Moon. What's so different about going to Mars (other than it being a planet instead of a moon obviously)? How does "god" relate to the one and not the other?

astronauts have successfully grown plants and vegetables aboard the International Space Station

Why doesn't the ISS count?

 

[Blues Man]

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

No true scientist, at that I know of, disputes the FACT that new species have come into being. The fossil record PROVES this is a fact.
No theory is perfect but Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we have that explains the world we see and most scientists agree. If you don't have a better theory, which you don't, it is reasonable to accept Darwin's Natural Selection as the mechanism of evolution we see.

Define "fact."

Yo you never explained why so much of gods creations all died out. Is god stupid or something

All part of the Grand Plan, doncha know? The shockingly beautiful, so immediately evident, "Intelligent Design"!

If there is an "Intelligent Designer" they are very odd, sometimes they were really lazy and sometimes they made extra work for themselves.

They continued to reuse existing body plans to perform very different functions. Think about the fingers of a bat being used to form a wing. Sometimes they did just the opposite, using very different body plans to form the same function. Think about how much the porpoise resembles the shark.

Just like human designers reuse workable body plans

Dinos were very successful but were replaced by mammals. What happened to them and where did birds come from? Does the world really need 3 type of mammal body plans?

Wrong question. You should be asking where did the code that evolves come from as code does not spontaneously generate

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

And, on you three.....the indoctrination worked.

As long as there are weak-minded, easily led folks, Militant Secularism will succeed.

I have never once called Evolution a fact. If you think I have then please find that quote and post it.

When you can't find that quote, will you have the integrity to admit you just lied about my stance?

I bet not.

In the meanwhile you have not provided any proof that any text books used in US public schools state that evolution is a proven scientific fact.

Didn't you ask me to find Darwinist propaganda in textbooks?

I sure put a cork in your pie hole, huh?

You need to learn to read

I asked you for evidence that the public school text books call the Theory of evolution a scientifically proven fact.

That is after all what you are whining about isn't it??????????????????????????????????

You need to learn to read: I gave you two examples the texts used to 'prove' Darwin.

Both are lies.

And in neither example were the words "scientifically proven fact" present. And the second one was some 19th century crap that you have not proven is still being taught in public schools today.

The fact is we do see both animal and plant species change over time due to many external factors. You agreed that speciation can happen in plants and I posted a link to what biologists believe to be the onset of speciation in a bird population.

So are you denying these things too?

So please post something from a widely used public school text that definitively states Darwin's Theory of evolution is a scientifically proven fact. That is you argument is it not?

Maybe you don't realize that saying we can see changes in animal species over time is not the same as saying Darwin's theory has been scientifically proven to be fact



The Big Bang is also a theory taught in schools and while it is widely accepted it still is not fact.

Cars evolve over time too, god merely created a way so that his designs improve themselves. Evolution is based upon changing code so without the code there is nothing to evolve thus god becomes a scientific need, just like dark matter

No cars rust over time.

There is no comparison between an inanimate object and a living thing.

And when you can give me scientific proof that some supreme being exists and that same supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything let me know.

DNA could have existed long before life itself

The idea that life began with RNA – simpler than DNA – looks less certain now that a DNA-like molecule has been made from basic compounds

www.newscientist.com

Chemists are close to demonstrating that the building blocks of DNA can form spontaneously from chemicals thought to be present on the primordial Earth.


After decades of trying, in 2009 researchers finally managed to generate RNA using chemicals that probably existed on the early Earth. Matthew Powner, now at University College London, and his colleagues synthesised two of the four nucleotides that make up RNA. Their achievement suggested that RNA may have formed spontaneously – powerful support for the idea that life began in an “RNA world”.

Did life emerge in the 'primordial soup' via DNA or RNA? Maybe both

Scientists have long debated which genetic information carrier—DNA or RNA—started life on Earth, but a new study suggests life could have begun with a bit of both. The research, led by scientists from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB), in Cambridge, shows...

phys.org

Life corrodes over time too, which is why god designed reproduction and evolution

There is no valid comparison between animate and inanimate objects

It's just a matter of time before computers become true ai or self aware

You read too much Sci fi.

That is what ibm said to Bill Gates when he licenced windows

And that makes it an inevitability>?

God is proved the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet. Self aware computers are a minor thing when compared to proving god

Sorry try again.

The existence of any god is proved when a person can see that god and that sighting is verified by other sources.
Then it has to be proven that this being actually has supernatural powers of creation.

So when you can introduce me in person to a being that can prove it has the power of creation and demonstrates that power by creating a universe as I watch we can talk.

Actually the people who settle and begin farming on mars will be able to see themselves

Really

So are you saying that a god lives on Mars?

No I am saying that I believe as do most of the earths population that God brought life to a new planet called earth. So it follows that when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet that humans have performed the god function and will effectively be spreading life as god once did, thus humans become god.

So like most people you believe some supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything

But there is no proof such a being exists

Actually there is proof that we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet

No there is speculation and that's about it.

And even if we do we won't be creating new life on Mars but we will try to alter conditions so we can grow what already grows on earth

 

[Blues Man]

The moon has no atmosphere silly

Oh, is that a problem? The atmosphere on Mars is so much more inviting?

Atmosphere
Surface pressure	0.636 (0.4–0.87) kPa 0.00628 atm

Nothing comparable to Earth, sparky.. and cold!

True there will be mars greenhouses

To do that we would need to supply atmospheric conditions for earth plants and that's not as easy as you seem to think it is.

 

[esalla]

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

No true scientist, at that I know of, disputes the FACT that new species have come into being. The fossil record PROVES this is a fact.
No theory is perfect but Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we have that explains the world we see and most scientists agree. If you don't have a better theory, which you don't, it is reasonable to accept Darwin's Natural Selection as the mechanism of evolution we see.

Define "fact."

Yo you never explained why so much of gods creations all died out. Is god stupid or something

All part of the Grand Plan, doncha know? The shockingly beautiful, so immediately evident, "Intelligent Design"!

If there is an "Intelligent Designer" they are very odd, sometimes they were really lazy and sometimes they made extra work for themselves.

They continued to reuse existing body plans to perform very different functions. Think about the fingers of a bat being used to form a wing. Sometimes they did just the opposite, using very different body plans to form the same function. Think about how much the porpoise resembles the shark.

Just like human designers reuse workable body plans

Dinos were very successful but were replaced by mammals. What happened to them and where did birds come from? Does the world really need 3 type of mammal body plans?

Wrong question. You should be asking where did the code that evolves come from as code does not spontaneously generate

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

And, on you three.....the indoctrination worked.

As long as there are weak-minded, easily led folks, Militant Secularism will succeed.

I have never once called Evolution a fact. If you think I have then please find that quote and post it.

When you can't find that quote, will you have the integrity to admit you just lied about my stance?

I bet not.

In the meanwhile you have not provided any proof that any text books used in US public schools state that evolution is a proven scientific fact.

Didn't you ask me to find Darwinist propaganda in textbooks?

I sure put a cork in your pie hole, huh?

You need to learn to read

I asked you for evidence that the public school text books call the Theory of evolution a scientifically proven fact.

That is after all what you are whining about isn't it??????????????????????????????????

You need to learn to read: I gave you two examples the texts used to 'prove' Darwin.

Both are lies.

And in neither example were the words "scientifically proven fact" present. And the second one was some 19th century crap that you have not proven is still being taught in public schools today.

The fact is we do see both animal and plant species change over time due to many external factors. You agreed that speciation can happen in plants and I posted a link to what biologists believe to be the onset of speciation in a bird population.

So are you denying these things too?

So please post something from a widely used public school text that definitively states Darwin's Theory of evolution is a scientifically proven fact. That is you argument is it not?

Maybe you don't realize that saying we can see changes in animal species over time is not the same as saying Darwin's theory has been scientifically proven to be fact



The Big Bang is also a theory taught in schools and while it is widely accepted it still is not fact.

Cars evolve over time too, god merely created a way so that his designs improve themselves. Evolution is based upon changing code so without the code there is nothing to evolve thus god becomes a scientific need, just like dark matter

No cars rust over time.

There is no comparison between an inanimate object and a living thing.

And when you can give me scientific proof that some supreme being exists and that same supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything let me know.

DNA could have existed long before life itself

The idea that life began with RNA – simpler than DNA – looks less certain now that a DNA-like molecule has been made from basic compounds

www.newscientist.com

Chemists are close to demonstrating that the building blocks of DNA can form spontaneously from chemicals thought to be present on the primordial Earth.


After decades of trying, in 2009 researchers finally managed to generate RNA using chemicals that probably existed on the early Earth. Matthew Powner, now at University College London, and his colleagues synthesised two of the four nucleotides that make up RNA. Their achievement suggested that RNA may have formed spontaneously – powerful support for the idea that life began in an “RNA world”.

Did life emerge in the 'primordial soup' via DNA or RNA? Maybe both

Scientists have long debated which genetic information carrier—DNA or RNA—started life on Earth, but a new study suggests life could have begun with a bit of both. The research, led by scientists from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB), in Cambridge, shows...

phys.org

Life corrodes over time too, which is why god designed reproduction and evolution

There is no valid comparison between animate and inanimate objects

It's just a matter of time before computers become true ai or self aware

You read too much Sci fi.

That is what ibm said to Bill Gates when he licenced windows

And that makes it an inevitability>?

God is proved the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet. Self aware computers are a minor thing when compared to proving god

Sorry try again.

The existence of any god is proved when a person can see that god and that sighting is verified by other sources.
Then it has to be proven that this being actually has supernatural powers of creation.

So when you can introduce me in person to a being that can prove it has the power of creation and demonstrates that power by creating a universe as I watch we can talk.

Actually the people who settle and begin farming on mars will be able to see themselves

Really

So are you saying that a god lives on Mars?

No I am saying that I believe as do most of the earths population that God brought life to a new planet called earth. So it follows that when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet that humans have performed the god function and will effectively be spreading life as god once did, thus humans become god.

So like most people you believe some supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything

But there is no proof such a being exists

Actually there is proof that we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet

No there is speculation and that's about it.

And even if we do we won't be creating new life on Mars but we will try to alter conditions so we can grow what already grows on earth

Genetic engineering would be faster

 

[Blues Man]

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

No true scientist, at that I know of, disputes the FACT that new species have come into being. The fossil record PROVES this is a fact.
No theory is perfect but Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we have that explains the world we see and most scientists agree. If you don't have a better theory, which you don't, it is reasonable to accept Darwin's Natural Selection as the mechanism of evolution we see.

Define "fact."

Yo you never explained why so much of gods creations all died out. Is god stupid or something

All part of the Grand Plan, doncha know? The shockingly beautiful, so immediately evident, "Intelligent Design"!

If there is an "Intelligent Designer" they are very odd, sometimes they were really lazy and sometimes they made extra work for themselves.

They continued to reuse existing body plans to perform very different functions. Think about the fingers of a bat being used to form a wing. Sometimes they did just the opposite, using very different body plans to form the same function. Think about how much the porpoise resembles the shark.

Just like human designers reuse workable body plans

Dinos were very successful but were replaced by mammals. What happened to them and where did birds come from? Does the world really need 3 type of mammal body plans?

Wrong question. You should be asking where did the code that evolves come from as code does not spontaneously generate

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

And, on you three.....the indoctrination worked.

As long as there are weak-minded, easily led folks, Militant Secularism will succeed.

I have never once called Evolution a fact. If you think I have then please find that quote and post it.

When you can't find that quote, will you have the integrity to admit you just lied about my stance?

I bet not.

In the meanwhile you have not provided any proof that any text books used in US public schools state that evolution is a proven scientific fact.

Didn't you ask me to find Darwinist propaganda in textbooks?

I sure put a cork in your pie hole, huh?

You need to learn to read

I asked you for evidence that the public school text books call the Theory of evolution a scientifically proven fact.

That is after all what you are whining about isn't it??????????????????????????????????

You need to learn to read: I gave you two examples the texts used to 'prove' Darwin.

Both are lies.

And in neither example were the words "scientifically proven fact" present. And the second one was some 19th century crap that you have not proven is still being taught in public schools today.

The fact is we do see both animal and plant species change over time due to many external factors. You agreed that speciation can happen in plants and I posted a link to what biologists believe to be the onset of speciation in a bird population.

So are you denying these things too?

So please post something from a widely used public school text that definitively states Darwin's Theory of evolution is a scientifically proven fact. That is you argument is it not?

Maybe you don't realize that saying we can see changes in animal species over time is not the same as saying Darwin's theory has been scientifically proven to be fact



The Big Bang is also a theory taught in schools and while it is widely accepted it still is not fact.

Cars evolve over time too, god merely created a way so that his designs improve themselves. Evolution is based upon changing code so without the code there is nothing to evolve thus god becomes a scientific need, just like dark matter

No cars rust over time.

There is no comparison between an inanimate object and a living thing.

And when you can give me scientific proof that some supreme being exists and that same supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything let me know.

DNA could have existed long before life itself

The idea that life began with RNA – simpler than DNA – looks less certain now that a DNA-like molecule has been made from basic compounds

www.newscientist.com

Chemists are close to demonstrating that the building blocks of DNA can form spontaneously from chemicals thought to be present on the primordial Earth.


After decades of trying, in 2009 researchers finally managed to generate RNA using chemicals that probably existed on the early Earth. Matthew Powner, now at University College London, and his colleagues synthesised two of the four nucleotides that make up RNA. Their achievement suggested that RNA may have formed spontaneously – powerful support for the idea that life began in an “RNA world”.

Did life emerge in the 'primordial soup' via DNA or RNA? Maybe both

Scientists have long debated which genetic information carrier—DNA or RNA—started life on Earth, but a new study suggests life could have begun with a bit of both. The research, led by scientists from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB), in Cambridge, shows...

phys.org

Life corrodes over time too, which is why god designed reproduction and evolution

There is no valid comparison between animate and inanimate objects

It's just a matter of time before computers become true ai or self aware

You read too much Sci fi.

That is what ibm said to Bill Gates when he licenced windows

And that makes it an inevitability>?

God is proved the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet. Self aware computers are a minor thing when compared to proving god

Sorry try again.

The existence of any god is proved when a person can see that god and that sighting is verified by other sources.
Then it has to be proven that this being actually has supernatural powers of creation.

So when you can introduce me in person to a being that can prove it has the power of creation and demonstrates that power by creating a universe as I watch we can talk.

Actually the people who settle and begin farming on mars will be able to see themselves

Really

So are you saying that a god lives on Mars?

No I am saying that I believe as do most of the earths population that God brought life to a new planet called earth. So it follows that when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet that humans have performed the god function and will effectively be spreading life as god once did, thus humans become god.

So like most people you believe some supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything

But there is no proof such a being exists

Actually there is proof that we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet

No there is speculation and that's about it.

And even if we do we won't be creating new life on Mars but we will try to alter conditions so we can grow what already grows on earth

Genetic engineering would be faster

Not really since we would have to engineer organisms that could thrive in virtually zero atmosphere with zero water and have the ability to withstand the wild temperature swings on Mars as well as the solar radiation that is not deflected by an inherent planetary magnetic field as we have here on earth.

Tell me why do you think it would be so easy to do all that?

We do not have the will as a country a planet or collectively as human beings to undertake such a venture.

 

[esalla]

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

No true scientist, at that I know of, disputes the FACT that new species have come into being. The fossil record PROVES this is a fact.
No theory is perfect but Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we have that explains the world we see and most scientists agree. If you don't have a better theory, which you don't, it is reasonable to accept Darwin's Natural Selection as the mechanism of evolution we see.

Define "fact."

Yo you never explained why so much of gods creations all died out. Is god stupid or something

All part of the Grand Plan, doncha know? The shockingly beautiful, so immediately evident, "Intelligent Design"!

If there is an "Intelligent Designer" they are very odd, sometimes they were really lazy and sometimes they made extra work for themselves.

They continued to reuse existing body plans to perform very different functions. Think about the fingers of a bat being used to form a wing. Sometimes they did just the opposite, using very different body plans to form the same function. Think about how much the porpoise resembles the shark.

Just like human designers reuse workable body plans

Dinos were very successful but were replaced by mammals. What happened to them and where did birds come from? Does the world really need 3 type of mammal body plans?

Wrong question. You should be asking where did the code that evolves come from as code does not spontaneously generate

Somehow, there is a plot to advance Darwinism, even though many scientists have documented how very wrong the theory is.

And, on you three.....the indoctrination worked.

As long as there are weak-minded, easily led folks, Militant Secularism will succeed.

I have never once called Evolution a fact. If you think I have then please find that quote and post it.

When you can't find that quote, will you have the integrity to admit you just lied about my stance?

I bet not.

In the meanwhile you have not provided any proof that any text books used in US public schools state that evolution is a proven scientific fact.

Didn't you ask me to find Darwinist propaganda in textbooks?

I sure put a cork in your pie hole, huh?

You need to learn to read

I asked you for evidence that the public school text books call the Theory of evolution a scientifically proven fact.

That is after all what you are whining about isn't it??????????????????????????????????

You need to learn to read: I gave you two examples the texts used to 'prove' Darwin.

Both are lies.

And in neither example were the words "scientifically proven fact" present. And the second one was some 19th century crap that you have not proven is still being taught in public schools today.

The fact is we do see both animal and plant species change over time due to many external factors. You agreed that speciation can happen in plants and I posted a link to what biologists believe to be the onset of speciation in a bird population.

So are you denying these things too?

So please post something from a widely used public school text that definitively states Darwin's Theory of evolution is a scientifically proven fact. That is you argument is it not?

Maybe you don't realize that saying we can see changes in animal species over time is not the same as saying Darwin's theory has been scientifically proven to be fact



The Big Bang is also a theory taught in schools and while it is widely accepted it still is not fact.

Cars evolve over time too, god merely created a way so that his designs improve themselves. Evolution is based upon changing code so without the code there is nothing to evolve thus god becomes a scientific need, just like dark matter

No cars rust over time.

There is no comparison between an inanimate object and a living thing.

And when you can give me scientific proof that some supreme being exists and that same supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything let me know.

DNA could have existed long before life itself

The idea that life began with RNA – simpler than DNA – looks less certain now that a DNA-like molecule has been made from basic compounds

www.newscientist.com

Chemists are close to demonstrating that the building blocks of DNA can form spontaneously from chemicals thought to be present on the primordial Earth.


After decades of trying, in 2009 researchers finally managed to generate RNA using chemicals that probably existed on the early Earth. Matthew Powner, now at University College London, and his colleagues synthesised two of the four nucleotides that make up RNA. Their achievement suggested that RNA may have formed spontaneously – powerful support for the idea that life began in an “RNA world”.

Did life emerge in the 'primordial soup' via DNA or RNA? Maybe both

Scientists have long debated which genetic information carrier—DNA or RNA—started life on Earth, but a new study suggests life could have begun with a bit of both. The research, led by scientists from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB), in Cambridge, shows...

phys.org

Life corrodes over time too, which is why god designed reproduction and evolution

There is no valid comparison between animate and inanimate objects

It's just a matter of time before computers become true ai or self aware

You read too much Sci fi.

That is what ibm said to Bill Gates when he licenced windows

And that makes it an inevitability>?

God is proved the moment a human walks and builds on a dead planet. Self aware computers are a minor thing when compared to proving god

Sorry try again.

The existence of any god is proved when a person can see that god and that sighting is verified by other sources.
Then it has to be proven that this being actually has supernatural powers of creation.

So when you can introduce me in person to a being that can prove it has the power of creation and demonstrates that power by creating a universe as I watch we can talk.

Actually the people who settle and begin farming on mars will be able to see themselves

Really

So are you saying that a god lives on Mars?

No I am saying that I believe as do most of the earths population that God brought life to a new planet called earth. So it follows that when humans move life to a new previously lifeless planet that humans have performed the god function and will effectively be spreading life as god once did, thus humans become god.

So like most people you believe some supreme being snapped his fingers and created everything

But there is no proof such a being exists

Actually there is proof that we exist and will shortly be leaving the earth to live at a previously dead planet

No there is speculation and that's about it.

And even if we do we won't be creating new life on Mars but we will try to alter conditions so we can grow what already grows on earth

Genetic engineering would be faster

Not really since we would have to engineer organisms that could thrive in virtually zero atmosphere with zero water and have the ability to withstand the wild temperature swings on Mars as well as the solar radiation that is not deflected by an inherent planetary magnetic field as we have here on earth.

Tell me why do you think it would be so easy to do all that?

We do not have the will as a country a planet or collectively as human beings to undertake such a venture.

Again mars has an atmosphere and I see greenhouses with partial Martian conditions being used to develop new strains of life

But then I see computer errors before they happen too

Classified so do not bother

 

[Grumblenuts]

Again,..

"What's so different about going to Mars (other than it being a planet instead of a moon obviously)? How does "god" relate to the one and not the other?"

??? A simple "I don't know" at this point would serve very nicely..

 

[Grumblenuts]

In August 2019, astronomers reported that newly discovered long-term pattern of absorbance and albedo changes in the atmosphere of the planet Venus are caused by “unknown absorbers”, which may be chemicals or even large colonies of microorganisms high up in the atmosphere of Venus, it remains to be seen.

Uh oh, looks like your god may have moved on to Venus and given up on us..