james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
Was stumped by a Creationist
- Thread starter RandomPoster
- Start date
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,364
- 99,438
- 3,645
Well there's another book you will never read and wouldn't understand anyway....
[QUOTE="Votto, post: 21506827, member: 40768"
Would God ever be considered an alien?[/QUOTE]
Maybe not but if you’re referring to the God of The Old Testament he’s an awfully queer, unpredictably sadistic bastard.And that’s before we get to the bit about him torturing his own son (who is actually himself if you swallow trinitarian theology undigested)
Would God ever be considered an alien?[/QUOTE]
Maybe not but if you’re referring to the God of The Old Testament he’s an awfully queer, unpredictably sadistic bastard.And that’s before we get to the bit about him torturing his own son (who is actually himself if you swallow trinitarian theology undigested)
- Banned
- #264
Quote it please. Oops.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,133
- 14,041
- 2,190
"Creationism is not falsifiable"
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,133
- 14,041
- 2,190
I thought you said we can't learn from books.Well there's another book you will never read and wouldn't understand anyway....
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,364
- 99,438
- 3,645
Neat!
- Banned
- #268
Yes and you can point out how that argument is on par with arguing that you can’t disprove that the universe is the ejaculate of a cosmic street dog bursting into the anus of an extrauniversal doofus wearing a MAGA hat
Maybe not but if you’re referring to the God of The Old Testament he’s an awfully queer, unpredictably sadistic bastard.And that’s before we get to the bit about him torturing his own son (who is actually himself if you swallow trinitarian theology undigested)[/QUOTE]
I’m watching Star Trek. God is meaner than any villain on the show. There are aliens who will wipe out entire planets. Shoot. Gods done that plenty of times.
Maybe not but if you’re referring to the God of The Old Testament he’s an awfully queer, unpredictably sadistic bastard.And that’s before we get to the bit about him torturing his own son (who is actually himself if you swallow trinitarian theology undigested)[/QUOTE]
I’m watching Star Trek. God is meaner than any villain on the show. There are aliens who will wipe out entire planets. Shoot. Gods done that plenty of times.
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
Well there's another book you will never read and wouldn't understand anyway....
I never got past its review. Besides, it's by Lawrence Krauss who got trashed by William Lane Craig. Watched their debate.
"Atheists insist that all of nature can be explained on its own terms without invoking a supernatural creator. Some argue, as does Lawrence Krauss (figure 1) in his recent book A Universe from Nothing, that modern science has now made it plausible that space-time, matter-energy, and even the universe can emerge from nothing. As we shall see, these ideas are self-contradictory and not aligned with current thinking—even in the secular scientific community—concerning the possibility of a universe existing in the eternal past. Krauss does provide his readers with interesting insights into physics, the big bang theory, virtual particles, dark matter, inflation theory, the ‘landscape’ of a multiverse, dark energy, relativity, string theory, and science associated with these topics. However, he does not successfully show how the universe could emerge from nothing. Much of what is in Krauss’ book was brought out in a debate with William Lane Craig in 2011 at NC State University, a debate Craig won in my opinion. The debate is available for viewing on the internet.1"
Review Krauss universe from nothing - creation.com
I threw that in there because you keep attributing creation.com to me. I'm more AIG and ICR, but do not ignore creation.com.
Actually, I read this review when the book came out. Then what Krauss said came out in the debate so got it from the horse's mouth.
Is Lawrence Krauss a Physicist, or Just a Bad Philosopher?
Here, I'll give you a chance. What's your review of it?
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
God is not falsifiable, but creation science is. Evolution is not falsifiable. It's forensics science.
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,364
- 99,438
- 3,645
So you understand not single idea in that book. Therefore,you simply are not entitled or qualified to have any opinion on it, save for it's weight in pounds. So don't bring it up again.
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,364
- 99,438
- 3,645
There is no such thing as creation science.
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
Fort Fun Indiana
See. I was right. NASA is basing finding aliens on advanced technology and abiogenesis. Of course, creation scientists and I know they won't because abiogenesis is but a hypothesis. No abiogenesis. No aliens. I should trademark it
.
"Search for Bacteria and Archaea
To find life on another planet, Floyd’s robotic instrument would concentrate on identifying bacteria and archaea, members of a large group of single-cell microorganisms that thrive in diverse environments and are thought to be the first organisms to appear on Earth about 4 billion years ago. On Earth, one gram of soil typically contains about 40 million bacterial cells and a milliliter of fresh water usually holds 1 million cells.
Her concept, which she believes could deploy as a stand-alone robot or one of several instruments on a rover, relies on a widely used technique called fluorescent in situ hybridization — or FISH — developed to detect and locate the presence or absence of RNA or single-stranded DNA sequences on chromosomes. These threadlike structures are found in the nuclei of most living cells and carry genetic information in the form of genes. Since its development, FISH has been used for genetic counseling, medicine and species identification.
When performed in a laboratory, FISH involves, among other things, applying a sample to a slide, fixing the cells to increase cell-wall permeability, adding a nucleotide “probe” — a short sequence of typically 15 to 20 nucleotides along with a fluorescent tag for faster identification — and heating the sample. The slide is then placed under a microscope. When the nucleotide probe attaches to a similar nucleotide in the sample, it literally fluoresces or glows under a fluorescence microscope, helping researchers to identify the organism.
“I’m trying to determine whether I can do the same thing with a robot,” Floyd said, adding that she would want the system to carry as many as 10 probes to identify a broad range of single-cell organisms. “If there are even fragments of highly conserved genetic sequences that we see in every corner of Earth, FISH will be the tool capable of detecting it.”
The Automation Challenge
The challenge, she said, is simplifying and automating the process so that samples can be prepared on individual slides, heated, and automatically rotated for viewing under a microscope, which likely would have to be focused many times to see deep within the sample. With her funding, Floyd is developing the automated subsystems, including a focuser.
“The idea here is to replace with a robotic system what a scientist does in the lab,” she said. “I could be completely wrong” about life taking root on Mars or another solar system body in the same way that it did on Earth. “But how do we know? We’ve never looked.”
For more Goddard technology news, go to: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/summer_2018_final_web_version.pdf"
Scientist Developing Instrument for Finding Extraterrestrial Bacteria
See. I was right. NASA is basing finding aliens on advanced technology and abiogenesis. Of course, creation scientists and I know they won't because abiogenesis is but a hypothesis. No abiogenesis. No aliens. I should trademark it
."Search for Bacteria and Archaea
To find life on another planet, Floyd’s robotic instrument would concentrate on identifying bacteria and archaea, members of a large group of single-cell microorganisms that thrive in diverse environments and are thought to be the first organisms to appear on Earth about 4 billion years ago. On Earth, one gram of soil typically contains about 40 million bacterial cells and a milliliter of fresh water usually holds 1 million cells.
Her concept, which she believes could deploy as a stand-alone robot or one of several instruments on a rover, relies on a widely used technique called fluorescent in situ hybridization — or FISH — developed to detect and locate the presence or absence of RNA or single-stranded DNA sequences on chromosomes. These threadlike structures are found in the nuclei of most living cells and carry genetic information in the form of genes. Since its development, FISH has been used for genetic counseling, medicine and species identification.
When performed in a laboratory, FISH involves, among other things, applying a sample to a slide, fixing the cells to increase cell-wall permeability, adding a nucleotide “probe” — a short sequence of typically 15 to 20 nucleotides along with a fluorescent tag for faster identification — and heating the sample. The slide is then placed under a microscope. When the nucleotide probe attaches to a similar nucleotide in the sample, it literally fluoresces or glows under a fluorescence microscope, helping researchers to identify the organism.
“I’m trying to determine whether I can do the same thing with a robot,” Floyd said, adding that she would want the system to carry as many as 10 probes to identify a broad range of single-cell organisms. “If there are even fragments of highly conserved genetic sequences that we see in every corner of Earth, FISH will be the tool capable of detecting it.”
The Automation Challenge
The challenge, she said, is simplifying and automating the process so that samples can be prepared on individual slides, heated, and automatically rotated for viewing under a microscope, which likely would have to be focused many times to see deep within the sample. With her funding, Floyd is developing the automated subsystems, including a focuser.
“The idea here is to replace with a robotic system what a scientist does in the lab,” she said. “I could be completely wrong” about life taking root on Mars or another solar system body in the same way that it did on Earth. “But how do we know? We’ve never looked.”
For more Goddard technology news, go to: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/summer_2018_final_web_version.pdf"
Scientist Developing Instrument for Finding Extraterrestrial Bacteria
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,364
- 99,438
- 3,645
^^
This charlatan's tactic is called the "Gish Gallop". It's older than dirt.
And anyone who thinks we have gathered a representative sample of the universe is a terminal fool.
This charlatan's tactic is called the "Gish Gallop". It's older than dirt.
And anyone who thinks we have gathered a representative sample of the universe is a terminal fool.
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
An ad hominem attack instead of a review. You don't think I understand quantum field theory leading to unstable states? I can read complex subjects and be able to summarize. Why don't you show us how smart you aren't?
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
Gish knew proteins, but what does it have to do with NASA and finding aliens?
james bond
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2015
- 13,407
- 1,805
- 170
You are wrong again. I keep saying atheists are usually wrong and I'm right. There you go.
- Banned
- #280
She means that before the big bang, you can make whatever wild or fantastical claim you want about what existed before and as yet nobody can decisively prove to you beyond doubt that you’re wrong.
