Scientists Discover a Self-Replicating Protein Structure, And It Could Have Built The First Life on

Ringtone

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
911
Points
210
" Non Mutually Exclusive Craziness *

* Trifling False Conclusions A Bout Reductio Ad Absurdum With Out Rig Gore Of Non Necessary Point Of Origin For Current Time Frame *

t
imeless <=> unaffected by time <=> without end if without time <=> non existent where time is necessary

An origin of expansion for the local universe is supposed , thus the op argument neglects to suppose a state of origin for the local universe .

As a theory , a thing can not be separated from itself , thus ask whether nature exists eternally , and thus ask which elements of nature would not be an image of gawd ?

As sophisticated physical states are necessary for sentience and sapience , frequencies from mind of sentient and sapient beings could set states of potential wells through electromagnetic projection through non local realism .

Obsessions from sophisticated physical states with sentience and sapience could interact with deity gawds , or conceive deity gawds through electromagnetic projection .

A theory for deism as projections of aspirations from collective minds is not deemed non natural by naturalism .

Some claim scientific correlations between peace of mind physical arrangement of environments according to geometry , while others boast to mantra of crafted sigils codex .

My suggestion is to aspire to do good things so that good things will happen , and respect principalities of nature that determine cause and effect , and remember the scenario of ate that occurs in the eighth scene of greed tragedy when a hero succumbs to the exceptional qualities which made their actions heroic .

The strong anthropic principle (SAP), as proposed by John D. Barrow and Frank Tipler, states that the universe is in some sense compelled to eventually have conscious and sapient life emerge within it.

In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for '"reduction to absurdity"'), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity"), apagogical arguments, negation introduction or the appeal to extremes, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.[1][2] It can be used to disprove a statement by showing that it would inevitably lead to a ridiculous, absurd, or impractical conclusion,[3] or to prove a statement by showing that if it were false, then the result would be absurd or impossible.[4][5] Traced back to classical Greek philosophy in Aristotle's Prior Analytics[5] (Greek: ἡ εἰς τὸ ἀδύνατον ἀπόδειξις, lit. "demonstration to the impossible", 62b), this technique has been used throughout history in both formal mathematical and philosophical reasoning, as well as in debate.[6]

The "absurd" conclusion of a reductio ad absurdum argument can take a range of forms, as these examples show:

  • The Earth cannot be flat; otherwise, we would find people falling off the edge.
  • There is no smallest positive rational number because, if there were, then it could be divided by two to get a smaller one.
The first example argues that denial of the premise would result in a ridiculous conclusion, against the evidence of our senses. The second example is a mathematical proof by contradiction (also known as an indirect proof[7]), which argues that the denial of the premise would result in a logical contradiction (there is a "smallest" number and yet there is a number smaller than it).[8]

* Any Interest To Inquire In Other Stanza *


" Does Nature Include A Facility For Intuition "

* Complexities With Simple Beginnings *


Is it correct to equate timelessness with eternal ?

A fundamental a priori premise ascribes that constructs of nature be self evident .

For something to be intelligible and form complex systems its subsystems would include a basis for order .

Those theories for monism posit a monad as an identity element , an infinitesimal , an irrational number with a geometry , as a basis for order .

An esoteric allusion for an irrational number is a quality of infinitude as an eternal state of being and becoming through some transition , with all comprised emulating the quality ; progeneration is an example of being and becoming through some transition .

* Implicit Capacity For Projection *

I was impressed with embedded information in amyloid conformer ; because , geometry includes projection that could facilitate the means to introspection .

* Mono The Is Them Arguing Form And Function *

Infinitesimal - Wikipedia
In mathematics, infinitesimals are things so small that there is no way to measure them. The insight with exploiting infinitesimals was that entities could still retain certain specific properties, such as angle or slope, even though these entities were quantitatively small.[1] The word infinitesimal comes from a 17th-century Modern Latin coinage infinitesimus, which originally referred to the "infinity-th" item in a sequence. Infinitesimals are a basic ingredient in the procedures of infinitesimal calculus as developed by Leibniz, including the law of continuity and the transcendental law of homogeneity. In common speech, an infinitesimal object is an object that is smaller than any feasible measurement, but not zero in size—or, so small that it cannot be distinguished from zero by any available means. Hence, when used as an adjective, "infinitesimal" means "extremely small". To give it a meaning, it usually must be compared to another infinitesimal object in the same context (as in a derivative). Infinitely many infinitesimals are summed to produce an integral.

Monism - Wikipedia
Monism attributes oneness or singleness (Greek: μόνος) to a concept e.g., existence. Various kinds of monism can be distinguished:

    • Priority monism states that all existing things go back to a source that is distinct from them; e.g., in Neoplatonism everything is derived from The One.[1] In this view only one thing is ontologically basic or prior to everything else.
    • Existence monism posits that, strictly speaking, there exists only a single thing, the Universe, which can only be artificially and arbitrarily divided into many things.[2]
    • Substance monism asserts that a variety of existing things can be explained in terms of a single reality or substance.[3] Substance monism posits that only one kind of stuff exists, although many things may be made up of this stuff, e.g., matter or mind.

" Definitions Of God Insufficient And Usually Pretentious "

* Chemically Unconscious Anxiety *


A theory of natural selection for sentient beings would presume that a probability for success in survival improves with ability and opportunity to select more advantageous options .

An issue of investigation is whether it is at least possible that a propensity exists within inchoate elements of nature for them to assimilate into sophisticated physical states that eventually includes sentience .

The evidence of self replicating protein structures supports a theory that a propensity exists within inchoate elements of nature for those elements to assimilate into sophisticated physical states .

Amyloid and the origin of life: self-replicating catalytic amyloids as prebiotic informational and protometabolic entities
In the encryption process, environmental information is encoded in the three-dimensional structure of the amyloid conformer [27, 28].
The nucleation-dependent replication system is in-put sensitive, chiroselective, and error correcting.


* Projections And Personification Of Natural Reflex *
Those offering creation in full form as a valid explanation over natural processes unbounded by time would do well to consider extraterrestrials as their creator .
Why did you "gift" me with this incoherent collection of jargon? Can you summarize your point, whatever it is, in a few sentences, i.e., the thrust of it. Thanks.
 

Ringtone

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
911
Points
210
How do you know your God didn't also have a beginning? Maybe is just the last in a long line? Would the universe look any different if that were true?
Did you have a stroke?
 

Ringtone

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
911
Points
210
No need to answer, I know the answers already.
So you know that God created God, who created God, who created God, who created God ad infinitum, eh? If not a stroke, is it dope? Crack? LSD? Shrooms? A little of the ol' wacky weed? Did you go ask Alice when she's ten feet tall again?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
It is a shame that science doesn't have supernaturalism or the ''... because I say so'' argument used by ID'iot creationers.

"The gawds did it'' is so convenient.
If it was I say so, then somewhere along the line there would be a contradiction since I don't have all the answers.

I think I told you the best point or statement an atheist ever made, which I had no answer for, but God had an answer for him already with, "Every eye will see" in the Biblical prophecies.. Another is the swan neck experiment which shows abiogenesis is impossible. The Perserverance land rover getting ready to go spelunking on Mars will show no alien organisms. That is more evidence for God, creation, and the Bible. The atheists lose and creationists win again.

"It was God who did it" isn't really convenient because of Adam's sin, but that's a discussion for another day in the R&E forum.
 
Last edited:

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,357
Reaction score
4,895
Points
1,130
No need to answer, I know the answers already.
So you know that God created God, who created God, who created God, who created God ad infinitum, eh? If not a stroke, is it dope? Crack? LSD? Shrooms? A little of the ol' wacky weed? Did you go ask Alice when she's ten feet tall again?
Other than your usual "... because I say so", sidestep and dodge, it's valid to require the supernaturalist to explain the hierarchy of gods who created those gods lower on the hierarchical ladder.

Now would be a good time to present that "General Theory of Supernatural Creation".
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,357
Reaction score
4,895
Points
1,130
It is a shame that science doesn't have supernaturalism or the ''... because I say so'' argument used by ID'iot creationers.

"The gawds did it'' is so convenient.
If it was I say so, then somewhere along the line there would be a contradiction since I don't have all the answers.

I think I told you the best point or statement an atheist ever made, but God had an answer for him already in the Biblical prophecies.. Another is the swan neck experiment which shows abiogenesis is impossible. The Perserverance landrover getting ready to go spelunking on Mars will show no alien organisms. That is more evidence for God, creation, and the Bible. The atheists lose again.

"It was God who did it" isn't really convenient because of Adam's sin, but that's a discussion for another day.
Abiogenesis is not impossible since we know with certainty it occurred.

"Adam's sin" is hardly a supportable claim.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
How do you know your God didn't also have a beginning? Maybe is just the last in a long line? Would the universe look any different if that were true?
That's explained in the Bible as well as the Trinity. God is infinite so doesn't have a beginning nor end.

Would the universe look any different? The actual infinity can only exist in the supernatural. I'm assuming for not Adam's sin, I think it would look different. We all would be in heaven on Earth and never die. Things would be much easier for us such as growing organic foods. There would be better beauty and complexity. We would all worship God and learn about the Trinity and his history.
 

Ringtone

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
911
Points
210
The actual infinity can only exist in the supernatural.
Please explain to God and everybody what that statement means. Nobody knows but you, and you're very slippering about it. Thanks.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
Abiogenesis is not impossible since we know with certainty it occurred.

"Adam's sin" is hardly a supportable claim.
Abio is impossible b/c of the swan neck experiment. The scientific method cannot be fooled.

We know Adam committed the first sin and lost the domain of the world (heaven) to Satan b/c it says so in the Bible. The Bible is a supernatural book of God written by humans. Atheists do not get this and thus Darwin was able to make up an explanation for evolution.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
The actual infinity can only exist in the supernatural.
Please explain to God and everybody what that statement means. Nobody knows but you, and you're very slippering about it. Thanks.
Haha. I already did. 3x now (twice to you and once to alang1216 ). God is the actual infinite and has no beginning and end. He also has infinite powers so he can create space, time, the universe, Earth, and everything in it. We know he did b/c of the Bible. After we die and are arisen, then we get to experience the actual infinite.

After you die, you will be taken away from this Earth and universe in the fastest way possible.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,043
Reaction score
453
Points
140
" Much Two Due About Subscribing Through A Creed Getting From Hear To There "

* Macrocosm And Microcosm Limits Of Existentialism *

Haha. I already did. 3x now (twice to you and once to alang1216 ). God is the actual infinite and has no beginning and end. He also has infinite powers so he can create space, time, the universe, Earth, and everything in it. We know he did b/c of the Bible. After we die and are arisen, then we get to experience the actual infinite.
After you die, you will be taken away from this Earth and universe in the fastest way possible.
The issue with most goad arguments is a poor definition of gawd .

Some believe that death is as deep sleep without memory and a final day of reckoning would seem to be apparent immediately and consequent to the instance of death .

There are those which bury their own in wooden boxes after three days that suppose it takes 10 days from death for ones spirit to entirely leave ones body , does anyone know where one can rest comfortably for 10 days after death without being in a stifling box ?

At issue is where theists which exclaim the gist of their deity as a supreme example of some quality among deities , and some mono theists further exclaim there to be only one deity .

An issue with theories on monotheism is its reliance upon theories for monism that are premised upon a monad , an infinitesimal , an identity element , a member of an infinite set that is closed and complete , a smallest geometric entity of which all creation is comprised , an object with the qualities and properties of infinitude .

Consider where a monad is determined to be an irrational number with a quality of infinitude , although an irrational numbers is bound in a dimension of size and possesses some geometry , its qualities of infinitude are those of being and becoming through some transition .

Though a monad would include bias through its geometry , to presume that infinitesimals would be sentient or sapient , or to presume that a complete collective of an infinite set of monads is sentient or sapient , omniscient , with omnipotent will , rather than reflexive and open ended with a generic quality of substantive indifference to event outcomes - free will , seems less compelling than the latter .

All in existence would emulate the quality of infinitude from monads by induction , and by deduction one affirms that procreation is an emulation of being and becoming through some transition which are qualities of infinitude .

An after life , a chance for eternal life , transmutation of souls , reincarnation , being born again , the life to come , are all metaphors for passing on ones genetic identity through ones offspring , one haploid at a time , so that others both literally and figuratively as ones self may have an opportunity to experience sentience and sapience of life , where failures to procreate in perpetuity are described by the metaphors of final judgment with eternal damnation .

Though life is temporary , though there is suffering , would existence be better where sentience and sapience were not available to exist ?
 
Last edited:

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
13,189
Reaction score
1,894
Points
245
Location
Virginia
No need to answer, I know the answers already.
So you know that God created God, who created God, who created God, who created God ad infinitum, eh? If not a stroke, is it dope? Crack? LSD? Shrooms? A little of the ol' wacky weed? Did you go ask Alice when she's ten feet tall again?
Do you know that there was only ever one God? How do you know? Did He tell you?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,357
Reaction score
4,895
Points
1,130
Abiogenesis is not impossible since we know with certainty it occurred.

"Adam's sin" is hardly a supportable claim.
Abio is impossible b/c of the swan neck experiment. The scientific method cannot be fooled.

We know Adam committed the first sin and lost the domain of the world (heaven) to Satan b/c it says so in the Bible. The Bible is a supernatural book of God written by humans. Atheists do not get this and thus Darwin was able to make up an explanation for evolution.
Abiogenesis is possible because we know with 100% certainty it occurred.

How did humans come to write a supernatural book of the gods?

“... because it says so in the Bible” is not a convincing argument. Now, if you had written “... because it says so in the Book of the Dead”, that... that, would be a convincing argument.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
Abiogenesis is possible because we know with 100% certainty it occurred.

How did humans come to write a supernatural book of the gods?

“... because it says so in the Bible” is not a convincing argument. Now, if you had written “... because it says so in the Book of the Dead”, that... that, would be a convincing argument.
No, science does not back up abiogenesis. You are delusional and believe in fairy tales like all atheists.

What is the Book of the Dead? Atheists life story?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,357
Reaction score
4,895
Points
1,130
Abiogenesis is possible because we know with 100% certainty it occurred.

How did humans come to write a supernatural book of the gods?

“... because it says so in the Bible” is not a convincing argument. Now, if you had written “... because it says so in the Book of the Dead”, that... that, would be a convincing argument.
No, science does not back up abiogenesis. You are delusional and believe in fairy tales like all atheists.

What is the Book of the Dead? Atheists life story?
What fairy tales do evilutionist atheists believe in?

Did you never research the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,937
Reaction score
1,143
Points
170
Do you know that there was only ever one God? How do you know? Did He tell you?
Yes, he did thru the Bible.
And you know the Bible is correct because He said it was. I think the circular reasoning has made you dizzy.
How can it be circular if He said it first and was the only witness for creation? Furthermore, science backs him up.

Moreover, you just don't have it and thus has been led down the wrong path of your own circular reasoning. You may as well be a round peg in a square hole.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top