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

[Fort Fun Indiana]

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.

When a theory is true, it is not going to be disproved. Ever. Because it is true.

Yes we know there was a big bang. We literally took a picture of it. Yes, the rapid inflationary period is as much a fact as is the earth revolving about the Sun.

Yes, abiogenesis is a fact. Once there was no life in the universe, then there was. What connects these two states is abiogenesis. It's not a theory. It's the name of a process. The Theory of Abiogenesis would explain how it occured.

Yes, evolution is a fact. Yes, the theory of evolution -- that evolution is what brought us the diversity of species from a single common ancestor -- is true and is a fact.

This is getting into silly rhetorical territory, where you are casting blanket doubt on all knowledge. To what end? I mean, if you want to jump off of your roof and see if you "fall up", since gravity is "just a theory", be my guest. Same for taking a bath with a toaster, or for staring directly into the Sun.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don't claim to know The Answer,

To what specific question?

 

[Mac1958]

I don't claim to know The Answer,

To what specific question?

Where we came from.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don't claim to know The Answer,

To what specific question?

Where we came from.

I am probably in agreement, but i need a little clarity.

Humans evolved from an earlier ape species. That is where we came from. But i don't think that is what you mean.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

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.

Furthermore, your comments about "not knowing every detail of what happened in 2003, therefore we are going to struggle with 14 million years ago" completely miss the entire concept of an "effective theory".

An effective theory explains thr observations without having knowledge of every event causing them. For example, the Theory of Gravity. We can explain the behavior of two massive objects using this effective theory without knowing the behavior of every atom in each object.

Similarly, we know a few general things about the Iraq War that are not going to change, despite any new details that emerge. Example: disbanding the Iraqi Army resulted in the arming and manning of Al Qaeda and ISIS in Iraq. We don't have to know every action of every person involved to know this is a fact. Learning how they got recruited and exactly how and when they acquired and transported the weapons isn't going to change that.

The Big Bang theory (in its strictest sense: that there was a period of rapid inflation) is a well established effective theory.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't claim to know The Answer,

To what specific question?

Where we came from.

I am probably in agreement, but i need a little clarity.

Humans evolved from an earlier ape species. That is where we came from. But i don't think that is what you mean.

I go back far before that. The Big Bang Theory doesn't satisfy. So I doubt I'll have that answer in my lifetime.

Are most we most likely here as the result of chemistry & biology instead of deity? Yeah, that's my guess. But I'd be dishonest if I said I were absolutely 100% certain.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I go back far before that.

Thought so. So you mean, where EVERYTHING came from.

I don't think i have ever heard anyone but a religious person claim to know the true answer to that. And ironically, they claim to know while admitting they don't know, by saying gods did it. They just replace one mystery with another.

 

[Ringtone]

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.

You don't know the answer, eh? So why did you suggest that others believe in fairy tales? The latter allegation presupposes that you have absolute knowledge about something.

But that can't be right. According to you that would be egotistical.

But that doesn't make any sense either. I think you meant to say arrogant. But, then, that still doesn't make any sense.

We know you're not arrogant . . . except when you are by the power of knowing things absolutely while others believe in fairy tales. Yet you simultaneously claim the badge of ignorance as humility and fault others for being ignorant.

For crying out loud! Make up your mind.

By the way, what was the Question?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are most we most likely here as the result of chemistry & biology instead of deity

It's not, "either/or". We can take any deterministic, physical process and say, "Gods did that" via planning, or whatever. What we can and should safely assume is that everything did indeed arise from deterministic, physical processes, as the alternative is utterly absurd. In a universe where this does not hold, there is no such thing as causation, or evidence, or even valid logic. Clearly we do not live in such a universe.

Even those who claim we do live in such a universe are basically lying right up until the point where introducing magical horseshit suits their magical religious belief. They don't actually believe that, else they would not be able to function. They couldn't drive a car, because they would have no reason to think the car would stop when the brakes were applied. They could make no plans for the future, and they could not accept anything as "knowledge". Concepts like causation amd evidence could not exist in their minds without arbitrarily ruling out the magical horseshit, when convenient.

 

[edthecynic]

Telling me I'm going to hell means you're going to hell with me.

Fool.

Except I didn't say you are going to hell, I said your own BIBLE says YOU are going to BURN in HELL!!!!!

Matthew 5:22
... whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

 

[edthecynic]

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

Because your God said he created them in only 6 evenings and mornings.
Geezzz, haven't you morons ever read your own bible?

 

[Ringtone]

Because your God said he created them in only 6 evenings and mornings.
Geezzz, haven't you morons ever read your own bible?

Well, looky here. First Mac1958 says folks who know the "Answer" are ignorant, but he's not ignorant because he doesn't know the "Answer" . . . except when he does know the "Answer" and becomes ignorant. Mac1958's a real hoot! According to his own "logic," he's ignorant and arrogant . . . except when he arbitrarily isn't. Apparently he's still puzzling over his own absurdity as he still hasn't gotten back to us about the Question he suggested exists relative to his yet to be defined "Answer".

Now we got some lunatic calling people morons and babbling something or another about six evenings and mornings. Apparently he's a Bible-thumping fundamentalist . . . except when he's not.

 

[Hollie]

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

It might be helpful if you understood the terms you use. Biological evolution is a process that impacts populations of living organisms. Abiogenesis is the study of the beginning of biological life.

The Theory of Evolution only breaks down in conversations with those who don’t understand some very basic terms and definitions.

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

When a theory is true, it is not going to be disproved. Ever. Because it is true.

Yes we know there was a big bang. We literally took a picture of it. Yes, the rapid inflationary period is as much a fact as is the earth revolving about the Sun.

Yes, abiogenesis is a fact. Once there was no life in the universe, then there was. What connects these two states is abiogenesis. It's not a theory. It's the name of a process. The Theory of Abiogenesis would explain how it occured.

Yes, evolution is a fact. Yes, the theory of evolution -- that evolution is what brought us the diversity of species from a single common ancestor -- is true and is a fact.

This is getting into silly rhetorical territory, where you are casting blanket doubt on all knowledge. To what end? I mean, if you want to jump off of your roof and see if you "fall up", since gravity is "just a theory", be my guest. Same for taking a bath with a toaster, or for staring directly into the Sun.

But is it true?

You don't know. You only have a theory.

We took a picture of the big bang? I think not.

Hubble Telescope Reveals Farthest View Into Universe Ever

The Hubble Space Telescope has caught the farthest view into the unvierse yet, an Extreme Deep Field image that reveals 5,500 galaxies dating back 13.2 billion years into the universe's past. NASA released the new Hubble survey on Tuesday, Sept. 25.

www.space.com

That's like half a billion years after the suspected Big Bang.

Unless they've taken something further back since then. I doubt it.

" Yes, abiogenesis is a fact." Oh, it totally isn't. It's a theory.

" Yes, evolution is a fact. Yes, the theory of evolution -- that evolution is what brought us the diversity of species from a single common ancestor -- is true and is a fact."

Well, we evolve, but whether we came from "a single common ancestor" is probably not fact.

There were at least three types of humanoid creatures out there, Neanderthal being one of them. There might have been many more and we're a mixture of all of those.

" This is getting into silly rhetorical territory, where you are casting blanket doubt on all knowledge. "

This is HILARIOUS.

You're passing theory off as knowledge. Science is "casting blanket doubt" on things. That's exactly what the process is. People start with a hypothesis and try and prove it's wrong (thereby right). Some people accept the theory as TRUE, others don't. Those that don't are the ones who PUSH SCIENCE FORWARDS.

Those who claim their science has solidified into concrete are the ones who say "thou shalt not study science any more because WE ******* KNOW EVERYTHING YOU BASTARDS"

 

[themirrorthief]

It looks to me, based on my Google search, that scientists have no idea how life began.

They have some idea. But what they know for a fact is that it did begin. Once there was no life, then there was life. They wouldn't be worth a shit as scientists if they threw up their hands and said "the plagiarized iron age sky daddy did it!" and walked away.

life begins in a shady motel outside town...alcohol provides the spark and a nice dinner provides the energy

 

[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.

Furthermore, your comments about "not knowing every detail of what happened in 2003, therefore we are going to struggle with 14 million years ago" completely miss the entire concept of an "effective theory".

An effective theory explains thr observations without having knowledge of every event causing them. For example, the Theory of Gravity. We can explain the behavior of two massive objects using this effective theory without knowing the behavior of every atom in each object.

Similarly, we know a few general things about the Iraq War that are not going to change, despite any new details that emerge. Example: disbanding the Iraqi Army resulted in the arming and manning of Al Qaeda and ISIS in Iraq. We don't have to know every action of every person involved to know this is a fact. Learning how they got recruited and exactly how and when they acquired and transported the weapons isn't going to change that.

The Big Bang theory (in its strictest sense: that there was a period of rapid inflation) is a well established effective theory.

" An effective theory explains thr observations without having knowledge of every event causing them. "

"An effective theory" being the operative word here. It helps explain something. But it might not be right. We're constantly finding out things that kick theories out of the window, or change them slightly, because there's SO MUCH we don't know.

We make stuff up. We don't even know if there's a planet out near the Oort cloud, or if it's a mini black hole, or if there's some other force out there that's having an impact on our Solar System. And that's TODAY and it's NOT VERY FAR AWAY.

And you're telling me we KNOW what happened 14 billion years ago in a place far, far away.

" The Big Bang theory (in its strictest sense: that there was a period of rapid inflation) is a well established effective theory."

Yes, a "well established" as in, lots of people believe it "effective theory" as in, it hasn't (and probably can't be) proven.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But is it true?

You don't know. You only have a theory.

Oops, there you go again, making the same mistake. A scientific theory is the highest status an explanation can achieve. Whenever anyone says "only a theory", they embarrass themselves a bit. Theories can also be facts. "It's only a fact!" sounds kind of silly, no?

Is it true? Its known to be true as much as any theory can be known to be true. It passes every test, explains the observations, and has yielded accurate predictions in every way we know how to check them. Also, there is no other explanation that meets this criteria. This is how we know if explanations are true or not.

This is how we know the theory of evolution is fact.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

An effective theory" being the operative word here. It helps explain something.

No. It explains something all by itself. Again you have fallen down the rhetorical rabbit hole of casting undefined, blanket doubt on ALL knowledge. As you try to ise these overly vague and general talking points, you arent excluding anything we know. This is folly and a waste of time on your part, and it certainly does nothing to help any argument against the big bang being a fact.

 

[fncceo]

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

People shouldn't go through High School science on drugs.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, a "well established" as in, lots of people believe it "effective theory" as in, it hasn't (and probably can't be) proven.

That is 100% wrong. That's not a trait of an effective theory. You are just kind of making stuff up, now.