Why do so many Atheist and Christians misunderstand what Hell really is ?

[Photonic]

I would like to post this video that was brought to my attention.

101 - The Earth In Time And Space - Amazing Discoveries TV

I'm in the process of taking his stupid presentation apart. Obviously you can see just how little my opinion is of him at this point. Unfortunately I've only come up to 48:23.

 

[Youwerecreated]

oh so man did come from a primate. Why did you lie?

Man did not come FROM primates. That other dumbass had something correct for once: man IS a primate. You continue to show your complete lack of knowledge on this topic, while claiming everyone else wrong or lying. It's both hilarious and pathetic. But please, quote anything I've said so far that is a "lie" will you?

Can't wait till the next dumb thing you say while claiming you understand the concept. This is like comedy hour.

Chimps which your side claims is so close to a human can cross breed with apes but they can't with humans why not ? who is our nearest anceator these days ?

Please share: what is the animal that is produced when a chimp cross breeds with an ape.

You also seem to fail to realize that genetic similarities do not in and of themselves confer mating ability. For example, if I made two hypothetical species with identical genes but a vastly different number of chromosomes, they wouldn't be able to reproduce. But all this science stuff goes way above your head, so let's just keep things simple. Start by sharing the animal produced from apes and chimps, and we'll go from there.

I don't need an excuse. I can formulate my own thoughts on this matter. I don't have to wait for a better poster to come along and say something astute and then scream "that was what I was going to say!" like you two knuckleheads.

it is very reasonable to assume life begets life not reasonable to assume non-life begets life.

Doesn't really matter how many times you say this, it still has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Actually I take that back. It does matter how many times you say it after being corrected: each additional ignorant repetition makes your stance look even more inane.

Let me start by saying the two hardest subjects to discuss in a civil manner are politics and religion and this is not a discussion on politics.

If man is a product of evolution what did man evolve from ? They believe the billi is part chimp and gorilla.

So are you gonna answer my question what did humans evolve from or just ask questions ?


Wrong you say we are a product of a natural process called evolution so you would need to show how evolution got it's start.

Did you watch the video posted that totally shows support for a global flood. It destroys the geologic time line. It also shows the big bang as a big dud. Be sure to watch and learn something will you.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did life begin in a body of water or not ?

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

Yes,because your side said life began in water and it evolved and came up on land is that not what they teach ? what was this process called if it happened ?

 

[Photonic]

oh so man did come from a primate. Why did you lie?

Man did not come FROM primates. That other dumbass had something correct for once: man IS a primate. You continue to show your complete lack of knowledge on this topic, while claiming everyone else wrong or lying. It's both hilarious and pathetic. But please, quote anything I've said so far that is a "lie" will you?

Can't wait till the next dumb thing you say while claiming you understand the concept. This is like comedy hour.


Please share: what is the animal that is produced when a chimp cross breeds with an ape.

You also seem to fail to realize that genetic similarities do not in and of themselves confer mating ability. For example, if I made two hypothetical species with identical genes but a vastly different number of chromosomes, they wouldn't be able to reproduce. But all this science stuff goes way above your head, so let's just keep things simple. Start by sharing the animal produced from apes and chimps, and we'll go from there.

it is very reasonable to assume life begets life not reasonable to assume non-life begets life.

Doesn't really matter how many times you say this, it still has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Actually I take that back. It does matter how many times you say it after being corrected: each additional ignorant repetition makes your stance look even more inane.

Let me start by saying the two hardest subjects to discuss in a civil manner are politics and religion and this is not a discussion on politics.

If man is a product of evolution what did man evolve from ? They believe the billi is part chimp and gorilla.

So are you gonna answer my question what did humans evolve from or just ask questions ?


Wrong you say we are a product of a natural process called evolution so you would need to show how evolution got it's start.

Did you watch the video posted that totally shows support for a global flood. It destroys the geologic time line. It also shows the big bang as a big dud. Be sure to watch and learn something will you.

I am watching it, and right now my opinion of this so called professor is very, VERY low.

As a scientist I find the kind of intellectual dishonesty and pandering to the religious disdainful and harmful to the collective scientific entity that has over the years put so much sweat and blood into advancing our understanding.

Only to have this joker come along.

Me taking apart his presentation piece by piece has now become less of an opinion and more about showing why he doesn't have a damn clue what he is talking about, or if he does he is purposefully being incorrect about a GREAT many things.

Please be patient while I finish my review.

 

[Photonic]

Did life begin in a body of water or not ?

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

Yes,because your side said life began in water and it evolved and came up on land is that not what they teach ? what was this process called if it happened ?

The origin of life is not taught in schools as of yet simply because it is still a subject of scientific debate.

If it is taught in some instances, then it is taught alongside several of the other theories. (None of those are religious btw)

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did life begin in a body of water or not ?

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

I already answered this once.

All cells contain water. We are made up of approximately 60% water our brain 70%. So we have 4 billion cells containing water so it is reasonable to assume life began in water according to your theory.

One major problem for your side is that amino acids cannot form in water they are to soluble. So how did we get the building blocks of life in the water to create life ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

I dunno how life began, science is working on that.

Where life began and evolution have nothing to do with each other, as every other poster has desperately tried to get through to you and have failed (and i'm sure I will too).

I know you'll deny the fact of evolution, no matter how many facts are put in front of your face. You've proven that on the board, I won't let myself get drug into that exercise again where your end result is telling me Harvard scientists don't know what they're talking about and Yale scientists are sent by Satan, etc etc.

Did life begin in a body of water or not ?

I don't know, science doesn't know, no one knows for sure, the best answer you can get is probably.

Thank you for your honest answer now look at my earlier post.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I would like to post this video that was brought to my attention.

101 - The Earth In Time And Space - Amazing Discoveries TV

I'm in the process of taking his stupid presentation apart. Obviously you can see just how little my opinion is of him at this point. Unfortunately I've only come up to 48:23.

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

 

[Photonic]

I would like to post this video that was brought to my attention.

101 - The Earth In Time And Space - Amazing Discoveries TV

I'm in the process of taking his stupid presentation apart. Obviously you can see just how little my opinion is of him at this point. Unfortunately I've only come up to 48:23.

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Did life begin in a body of water or not ?

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

I already answered this once.

All cells contain water. We are made up of approximately 60% water our brain 70%. So we have 4 billion cells containing water so it is reasonable to assume life began in water according to your theory.

One major problem for your side is that amino acids cannot form in water they are to soluble. So how did we get the building blocks of life in the water to create life ?

Can i get a link that says in all cases amino acidsd cannot form in water?

I don't believe that to be the case.

(and again a link from a science based website, not religion based)

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

Yes,because your side said life began in water and it evolved and came up on land is that not what they teach ? what was this process called if it happened ?

The origin of life is not taught in schools as of yet simply because it is still a subject of scientific debate.

If it is taught in some instances, then it is taught alongside several of the other theories. (None of those are religious btw)

Stop it I have read enough of your shit to see that you do not I repeat do not know what you are talking about. Evolution is in fact taught in schools Prehistoric man is in fact taught in schools. I really don't know where you get your information nor do I care, but what I care about on both sides of the debate is misinformation from both sides and you sir are thinck in spreading that shit. Are you a believer oof UFO and life coming from outspace?

I'm in the process of taking his stupid presentation apart. Obviously you can see just how little my opinion is of him at this point. Unfortunately I've only come up to 48:23.

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

misinformation? No I think you are doing that

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yes,because your side said life began in water and it evolved and came up on land is that not what they teach ? what was this process called if it happened ?

The origin of life is not taught in schools as of yet simply because it is still a subject of scientific debate.

If it is taught in some instances, then it is taught alongside several of the other theories. (None of those are religious btw)

Stop it I have read enough of your shit to see that you do not I repeat do not know what you are talking about. Evolution is in fact taught in schools Prehistoric man is in fact taught in schools. I really don't know where you get your information nor do I care, but what I care about on both sides of the debate is misinformation from both sides and you sir are thinck in spreading that shit. Are you a believer oof UFO and life coming from outspace?

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

misinformation? No I think you are doing that

Evolution, gravity, plate tectonics, etc are all taught and should be.

Theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once "god did it" becomes a scientific theory it can be included, but not until then.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The origin of life is not taught in schools as of yet simply because it is still a subject of scientific debate.

If it is taught in some instances, then it is taught alongside several of the other theories. (None of those are religious btw)

Stop it I have read enough of your shit to see that you do not I repeat do not know what you are talking about. Evolution is in fact taught in schools Prehistoric man is in fact taught in schools. I really don't know where you get your information nor do I care, but what I care about on both sides of the debate is misinformation from both sides and you sir are thinck in spreading that shit. Are you a believer oof UFO and life coming from outspace?

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

misinformation? No I think you are doing that

Evolution, gravity, plate tectonics, etc are all taught and should be.

Theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once "god did it" becomes a scientific theory it can be included, but not until then.

But the board self proclaimed physicist disagree's with you. So why are you responding to me and not the self-proclaimed physicist

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'm in the process of taking his stupid presentation apart. Obviously you can see just how little my opinion is of him at this point. Unfortunately I've only come up to 48:23.

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

Then how do you explain stars and planets turning different directions from others ?

How do you get one layer of strata mixed in with the one above it if they were not soft ? Why does this errosion consistent with a flood show up all over the world ?

Did you not see his strata test confiring what he was saying ?

I'm sure others who watched the video will come up with questions as well. What do you think scientists that are in agreement with your side does,you don't think think they pander to the audience in front of them ? I'm not sure what kind of audience was in front of him. Don't you know creationists give talks at universities as well ?

 

[Photonic]

Of course because it destroys your two main theories that you believe to be unrefuted evidence of your main theory.

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

Then how do you explain stars and planets turning different directions from others ?

How do you get one layer of strata mixed in with the one above it if they were not soft ? Why does this errosion consistent with a flood show up all over the world ?

Did you not see his strata test confiring what he was saying ?

I'm sure others who watched the video will come up with questions as well. What do you think scientists that are in agreement with your side does,you don't think think they pander to the audience in front of them ? I'm not sure what kind of audience was in front of him. Don't you know creationists give talks at universities as well ?

You're really trying hard to convince yourself. I'm already covering all of this in my small review of his video. Just be patient.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Does this have anything to do with evolution or not ?

I already answered this once.

All cells contain water. We are made up of approximately 60% water our brain 70%. So we have 4 billion cells containing water so it is reasonable to assume life began in water according to your theory.

One major problem for your side is that amino acids cannot form in water they are to soluble. So how did we get the building blocks of life in the water to create life ?

Can i get a link that says in all cases amino acidsd cannot form in water?

I don't believe that to be the case.

(and again a link from a science based website, not religion based)

Solubility

Amino acids are generally soluble in water and insoluble in non-polar organic solvents such as hydrocarbons.

This again reflects the presence of the zwitterions. In water, the ionic attractions between the ions in the solid amino acid are replaced by strong attractions between polar water molecules and the zwitterions. This is much the same as any other ionic substance dissolving in water.

The extent of the solubility in water varies depending on the size and nature of the "R" group.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: At this point I would normally try to relate the actual values for solubility of the various amino acids to their structures. Unfortunately, from the solubility values that I have got (and I'm not convinced they are necessarily right), I can't find any obvious patterns - in fact, there are some very strange cases indeed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The lack of solubility in non-polar organic solvents such as hydrocarbons is because of the lack of attraction between the solvent molecules and the zwitterions. Without strong attractions between solvent and amino acid, there won't be enough energy released to pull the ionic lattice apart.

an introduction to amino acids

 

[Youwerecreated]

No, because I'm actually a physicist and he's spreading misinformation as a means of pandering to a specific audience.

Then how do you explain stars and planets turning different directions from others ?

How do you get one layer of strata mixed in with the one above it if they were not soft ? Why does this errosion consistent with a flood show up all over the world ?

Did you not see his strata test confiring what he was saying ?

I'm sure others who watched the video will come up with questions as well. What do you think scientists that are in agreement with your side does,you don't think think they pander to the audience in front of them ? I'm not sure what kind of audience was in front of him. Don't you know creationists give talks at universities as well ?

You're really trying hard to convince yourself. I'm already covering all of this in my small review of his video. Just be patient.

Of course his explanations are far more logical and provable then what your side say's.

 

[Photonic]

Then how do you explain stars and planets turning different directions from others ?

How do you get one layer of strata mixed in with the one above it if they were not soft ? Why does this errosion consistent with a flood show up all over the world ?

Did you not see his strata test confiring what he was saying ?

I'm sure others who watched the video will come up with questions as well. What do you think scientists that are in agreement with your side does,you don't think think they pander to the audience in front of them ? I'm not sure what kind of audience was in front of him. Don't you know creationists give talks at universities as well ?

You're really trying hard to convince yourself. I'm already covering all of this in my small review of his video. Just be patient.

Of course his explanations are far more logical and provable then what your side say's.

Benefits of science

Enjoy. I will not educate the blind who cover their ears when I speak.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I already answered this once.

All cells contain water. We are made up of approximately 60% water our brain 70%. So we have 4 billion cells containing water so it is reasonable to assume life began in water according to your theory.

One major problem for your side is that amino acids cannot form in water they are to soluble. So how did we get the building blocks of life in the water to create life ?

Can i get a link that says in all cases amino acidsd cannot form in water?

I don't believe that to be the case.

(and again a link from a science based website, not religion based)

Solubility

Amino acids are generally soluble in water and insoluble in non-polar organic solvents such as hydrocarbons.

This again reflects the presence of the zwitterions. In water, the ionic attractions between the ions in the solid amino acid are replaced by strong attractions between polar water molecules and the zwitterions. This is much the same as any other ionic substance dissolving in water.

The extent of the solubility in water varies depending on the size and nature of the "R" group.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: At this point I would normally try to relate the actual values for solubility of the various amino acids to their structures. Unfortunately, from the solubility values that I have got (and I'm not convinced they are necessarily right), I can't find any obvious patterns - in fact, there are some very strange cases indeed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The lack of solubility in non-polar organic solvents such as hydrocarbons is because of the lack of attraction between the solvent molecules and the zwitterions. Without strong attractions between solvent and amino acid, there won't be enough energy released to pull the ionic lattice apart.

an introduction to amino acids

Amino acids are generally soluble in water and insoluble in non-polar organic solvents such as hydrocarbons.

Generally? Yes

Always? No

 

[Youwerecreated]

You're really trying hard to convince yourself. I'm already covering all of this in my small review of his video. Just be patient.

Of course his explanations are far more logical and provable then what your side say's.

Benefits of science

Enjoy. I will not educate the blind who cover their ears when I speak.

I have a degree in molecular biology ,you won't teach me much more then I already know.

Good ol berkley link ,home of the atheiest and naturalist movement

Next I will be provided with your wiki support.

You guys are entertaining.