The Dead Old One Cell Speck Suddenly Came To Life , , ,

[Crepitus]

Old One Cell now at last has become "a Ronald Reagan"
and "a Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Ronny Raygun maybe, but not Notorious RBG.

Everyone knows toad-frogs are all republicans.

 

[Ringtone]

JAG Writes:
You have no Empirical Evidence that your original ancestor
was at one time a dead one-celled speck that lived in the
Primordial Slime and then later begin to pulsate with life.

Pulsate , , just a slight boom , , boom , , boom , , ,

I mean the one-celled speck was not always alive --so there
was a time when Old One-Cell was as dead as a door nail , ,

, , , but , , , ,

, , lo and behold , , ,

, , ,Old One Cell at some point became alive and it began to pulsate.

Then Time Passed.

After awhile Old One Cell, increased to the size of a pecan.

Then later on Old One Cell increased to the size of a baseball.

Then to the size of a Chicken.

A chicken , , ,

Then later on as Time Passed Old One Cell has now become a Toad Frog.
{or What Ever You Claim It Became}

But Old One Cell did not remain a Toad Frog.

On no.

Old One Cell eventually became a Chimp.

Then as time Passed a "scientific miracle" occurred , , ,

Here it comes , , ,

Old One Cell now at last has become "a Ronald Reagan"
and "a Ruth Bader Ginsburg."

And all that up there happened due to , , ,

~ natural selection
and
~ :random mutation
and
~ atoms and molecules wiggling around
and
~ chemical reactions taking place . . .

, , , and all that was produced by

~ unthinking non-intelligent Time
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Chance
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Matter , , ,

, , which produced a , ,

~ highly complex Human Brain

~ and a highly complex Human Eye, and

~ a highly complex Fully Functioning Human Body

So?

So if you believe all that up there, then you are a Great Man Of Faith
and you believe in the Religion Of Evolution.

My view is It requires MORE faith to believe in all that up there, than
it requires to believe in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He
gave His one and only Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish
but have Eternal Life."

Best.


JAG

If the old, one cell existed at the jump, why did it have to suddenly become alive? Redundancy?

 

[Ringtone]

IMO, you're the one without faith. If God gave us our brains, why did he make it appear that evolution had occurred, if it really hadn't? Why do you think God couldn't have made evolution his plan for how life would develop? It has absolutely nothing to do with John 3:16, as it does not mention creation at all. Try again. Your logic is lacking.

Evolutionists sometimes say the darnedest things. How, precisely, has God made it appear that evolution is true? You haven't thought things through, have you?

 

[Ringtone]

At some point the theory of evolution breaks down because scientists have never been able to create a life form from non-living material.

If a scientist were to create a life from nonliving material . . . that wouldn't prove evolution.

Folks, you really have to think clearly and carefully about these things.

 

[Ringtone]

Primordal soup?

Is that one of those ideas they didn't have?

Primordial soup is a meaningless fantasy.

 

[Ringtone]

We've also never made a planet, nor a black whole, or a sun, or a galaxy.... does this mean they don't exist?

That's the craziest non sequitur I've read in some time. What is your point?

 

[Ringtone]

Holy crap.

You're on "the internet".

If you were REALLY curious, you would have searched out and learned this stuff LONG ago.

Internet, eh?

Is that that where you're learned to unwittingly believe that naturalism was necessarily true sans thinking things through? Some kind of knee-jerk reaction?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So, they general idea is that small, primitive protostructures formed in a liquid environment, with lots of hydrocarbons around in the slurry. We know they were around, because they are still here (see: biomass). Longer and longer molecules started forming. Then, little groups of molecules that, for reasons unknown to them, liked to glom together... did so (they still do so. We do it in the lab every day.). For example: Certain lipids would glom together and form little membranes, because one end of each chain is hydrophobic, the other hydrophilic. This is an example of a simple structure forming via the selection of physical forces.

Sometimes other chemicals or structures could get through the membrane but not out, and some could not get in (but could get out). Sometimes, structures would get broken in two. When this resulted in two "successful" pieces, physical forces selected for division. These things happened trillions of trillions of times over 100s of millions of years. Eventually, dividing structures that replicated were doing so with "successful" models that persisted for at least a little while. Is that life?

Even later, the prototypes of RNA and DNA came along and starting assisting certain functions that were already happening, like: division, replication, formation/regulation of the membranes, etc. RNA and DNA would have formed from these proto-structures, being such stable and successful models that they were "selected for" and monopolized the available resources using their slave sacs (cells). They literally ate the other "dumber" structures floating around, many of them probably running on the older, prototype engines.

It should come as no surprise that the most stable and efficient models persisted. That's selection.

 

[Ringtone]

At some point the theory of evolution breaks down because scientists have never been able to create a life form from non-living material.

Evolution doesn't claim to show how life began.

The first living organism? Magic? Divinity? Chemical evolution, a.k.a,, abiogenesis?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first living organism? Magic? Divinity? Chemical evolution, a.k.a,, abiogenesis?

No such thing, except by some arbitrary definition. So choose the one you like.

 

[konradv]

IMO, you're the one without faith. If God gave us our brains, why did he make it appear that evolution had occurred, if it really hadn't? Why do you think God couldn't have made evolution his plan for how life would develop? It has absolutely nothing to do with John 3:16, as it does not mention creation at all. Try again. Your logic is lacking.

Evolutionists sometimes say the darnedest things. How, precisely, has God made it appear that evolution is true? You haven't thought things through, have you?

The fossil record for one. If everything was created at the same time, why aren't they all found at the same level? IMO, if this doesn't prove evolution, then you're saying God lies to us.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oh right. You take a "picture" and you could see there were no atoms?

The picture is of the CMB, which resulted from the decoupling event during the recombination epoch. Do you know what the CMB is, what the recombination epoch is, and what the decoupling event is? In short, the CMB is the radiation that resulted from the formation of the very first atoms. Before the first atoms, how many atoms do you think there were? Zero, of course.

The next time you run into something you don't understand, you might want to consider first the idea that you don't understand it, before attempting to mock it.

The problem is our knowledge is never going to be complete. You can make a theory and then at some point it'll be disproved. We don't even know if there was a Big Bang or not. It's a theory.

We get evidence thrown at us, we can try and interpret these, but imagine trying to figure out what happened in a Roman battle by finding one spear tip. It's never going to be enough information to give us a whole picture. We have to fill in the gaps and most of the time we'll have an educated stab at it, and we also might be very, very wrong.

This isn't about something I don't understand. It's about something WE ALL DON'T UNDERSTAND. We struggle to know what happened in the Iraq War in 2003, so we're going to struggle with 14 billion years ago.

 

[Ringtone]

The fossil record for one. If everything was created at the same time, why aren't they all found at the same level? IMO, if this doesn't prove evolution, then you're saying God lies to us.

Why do all life forms have to be created at the same time?

 

[Ringtone]

The fossil record for one. If everything was created at the same time, why aren't they all found at the same level? IMO, if this doesn't prove evolution, then you're saying God lies to us.

In any event, I don't why all lifeforms had to be created at the same time, especially when they obviously weren't, and I thought you were an evolutionist. Also, what's this about God lying to us? That seems to be out of the Twilight Zone. This is what I mean about folks needing to think these things through clearly and carefully.

 

[Colin norris]

JAG Writes:
You have no Empirical Evidence that your original ancestor
was at one time a dead one-celled speck that lived in the
Primordial Slime and then later begin to pulsate with life.

Pulsate , , just a slight boom , , boom , , boom , , ,

I mean the one-celled speck was not always alive --so there
was a time when Old One-Cell was as dead as a door nail , ,

, , , but , , , ,

, , lo and behold , , ,

, , ,Old One Cell at some point became alive and it began to pulsate.

Then Time Passed.

After awhile Old One Cell, increased to the size of a pecan.

Then later on Old One Cell increased to the size of a baseball.

Then to the size of a Chicken.

A chicken , , ,

Then later on as Time Passed Old One Cell has now become a Toad Frog.
{or What Ever You Claim It Became}

But Old One Cell did not remain a Toad Frog.

On no.

Old One Cell eventually became a Chimp.

Then as time Passed a "scientific miracle" occurred , , ,

Here it comes , , ,

Old One Cell now at last has become "a Ronald Reagan"
and "a Ruth Bader Ginsburg."

And all that up there happened due to , , ,

~ natural selection
and
~ :random mutation
and
~ atoms and molecules wiggling around
and
~ chemical reactions taking place . . .

, , , and all that was produced by

~ unthinking non-intelligent Time
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Chance
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Matter , , ,

, , which produced a , ,

~ highly complex Human Brain

~ and a highly complex Human Eye, and

~ a highly complex Fully Functioning Human Body

So?

So if you believe all that up there, then you are a Great Man Of Faith
and you believe in the Religion Of Evolution.

My view is It requires MORE faith to believe in all that up there, than
it requires to believe in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He
gave His one and only Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish
but have Eternal Life."

Best.


JAG

You can rattle on forever about your God etc, but nothing will extinguish the truth. Evolution is not a talking point, it is fact now. The alternatives of creators and spirits is fairy tales and should be treated as such.

I'll challenge anyone to produce irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

 

[Colin norris]

At some point the theory of evolution breaks down because scientists have never been able to create a life form from non-living material.

JAG Writes:
You have no Empirical Evidence that your original ancestor
was at one time a dead one-celled speck that lived in the
Primordial Slime and then later begin to pulsate with life.

Pulsate , , just a slight boom , , boom , , boom , , ,

I mean the one-celled speck was not always alive --so there
was a time when Old One-Cell was as dead as a door nail , ,

, , , but , , , ,

, , lo and behold , , ,

, , ,Old One Cell at some point became alive and it began to pulsate.

Then Time Passed.

After awhile Old One Cell, increased to the size of a pecan.

Then later on Old One Cell increased to the size of a baseball.

Then to the size of a Chicken.

A chicken , , ,

Then later on as Time Passed Old One Cell has now become a Toad Frog.
{or What Ever You Claim It Became}

But Old One Cell did not remain a Toad Frog.

On no.

Old One Cell eventually became a Chimp.

Then as time Passed a "scientific miracle" occurred , , ,

Here it comes , , ,

Old One Cell now at last has become "a Ronald Reagan"
and "a Ruth Bader Ginsburg."

And all that up there happened due to , , ,

~ natural selection
and
~ :random mutation
and
~ atoms and molecules wiggling around
and
~ chemical reactions taking place . . .

, , , and all that was produced by

~ unthinking non-intelligent Time
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Chance
plus
~ unthinking non-intelligent Matter , , ,

, , which produced a , ,

~ highly complex Human Brain

~ and a highly complex Human Eye, and

~ a highly complex Fully Functioning Human Body

So?

So if you believe all that up there, then you are a Great Man Of Faith
and you believe in the Religion Of Evolution.

My view is It requires MORE faith to believe in all that up there, than
it requires to believe in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He
gave His one and only Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish
but have Eternal Life."

Best.


JAG

The Theory of Evolution is just that, a theory. That means it it subject to change as new information is found. But, a change in the root of the theory doesn't invalidate the findings that follow. Including, God. If evidence is provided showing that God was responsible for "creation" then the theory will change to accommodate this new information.
In your concept if there is no God then everything that follows is false.
There is plenty of evidence supporting Evolution.
There has never been any evidence supporting the existence of any God.

That is not the definition of a theory.
Please check it in wiki or dictionary.

 

[Mac1958]

Holy crap.

You're on "the internet".

If you were REALLY curious, you would have searched out and learned this stuff LONG ago.

Internet, eh?

Is that that where you're learned to unwittingly believe that naturalism was necessarily true sans thinking things through? Some kind of knee-jerk reaction?

You're free to believe whatever fairytale you'd like.

 

[Ringtone]

You're free to believe whatever fairytale you'd like.

You're the one who believes naturalism is true. . . .

 

[Ringtone]

You can rattle on forever about your God etc, but nothing will extinguish the truth. Evolution is not a talking point, it is fact now. The alternatives of creators and spirits is fairy tales and should be treated as such.

I'll challenge anyone to produce irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

So you have a proof that naturalism is true, eh?

 

[Mac1958]

You're free to believe whatever fairytale you'd like.

You're the one who believes naturalism is true. . . .

I don't claim to know The Answer, and I'm very comfy with that.

Those who do, in either direction, seem egotistical and ignorant to me.