The Case Against Playing in the Evolution Court.

a reply to: edmc^2

DNA can't come about w/o preexisting life.

Really? Care to cite some evidence? I and others can certainly cite a truckload of evidence that you're wrong - again.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

If you read beyond the end of your nose you would see that it directs you to a YouTube link. In your case, you just don't want to know so any excuse will work.

check your link before you post.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

DNA can't come about w/o preexisting life.

Really? Care to cite some evidence? I and others can certainly cite a truckload of evidence that you're wrong - again.

there's no evidence of DNA forming by itself - FORMING BY ITS OWN VOLITION, BY ITS OWN BOOTSTRAP. Only conjecture, like evolution - it's a coulda, would, shoulda... I think therefore ...bla blaah.

It ain't gonna happen without an existing life.

And the goalpost moves again.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

DNA can't come about w/o preexisting life.

Really? Care to cite some evidence? I and others can certainly cite a truckload of evidence that you're wrong - again.

there's no evidence of DNA forming by itself - FORMING BY ITS OWN VOLITION, BY ITS OWN BOOTSTRAP. Only conjecture, like evolution - it's a coulda, would, shoulda... I think therefore ...bla blaah.

It ain't gonna happen without an existing life.

Yes there is.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

If you read beyond the end of your nose you would see that it directs you to a YouTube link. In your case, you just don't want to know so any excuse will work.

check your link before you post.

www.youtube.com...



Glad I have it handy.

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

If you read beyond the end of your nose you would see that it directs you to a YouTube link. In your case, you just don't want to know so any excuse will work.

check your link before you post.

www.youtube.com...

Glad I have it handy.

hahaha. synthetic cell. More like a designer cell.

You people are so desperate to prove the unprovable that you missed the obvious.

Tell me this if you're so knowledgeable on this subject.

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code to create the synthetic cell?

good luck.

a reply to: edmc^2

Your argument is fallacious.


Argument from Incredulity:
An appeal to common sense, or personal incredulity, asserts that because something is so incredible or difficult to imagine, it is wrong. ... Arguments from incredulity can take the form: I cannot imagine how F could be true; therefore F must be false.

Evolution is a fact.

The theory (MES) is the explanation of said fact.

Check out Ted Talks.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
And the goalpost moves again.

Have you learned nothing from Raggedy? We don’t get to decide where the goal posts are. Thus, it is imperative for the creationists, Young Earth or otherwise, to repeatedly obfuscate any potential for a legitimate discussion in lieu of honesty so that they can steer the ship at full Gish Gallop!

a reply to: edmc^2

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code to create the synthetic cell?

A computer program. Created by a human on a computer created by machines and humans created from materials made by machines and humans.

See sig.

The problem here as I see it, is not that the theory of evolution isn't compelling enough. It is that a system of beliefs based on prophecies and medical miracles and other supernatural events can't muster the mind boggling substance that is retold through centuries of incredible literature but simply can't be reproduced in the modern age. It would be so easy to just do a simple performance as a gesture of good will and proof of concept, and there is no risk or cost at all. It would convert millions in a single day. But for some reason, it has not happened. We take that silence as an omen, a fact of reality the same way seeing a dead body is a fact. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Surely an earth stopping display of divine authority and unrivaled philanthropic force is exactly what this species needs to persuade us. So what's keeping your god from showing his or her hand and winning the whole debate with literally zero effort? That's my big question.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
The problem here as I see it, is not that the theory of evolution isn't compelling enough.

No that's exactly what it is. No organism has ever been observed to change into another organism. There are no complete fossils between the theoretical ancestral ape and homo sapien. Soft tissue is found in dinosaurs indicating they are younger than the theory demands. A WWII plane was found in a super deep layer of ice in greenland, indicating that dating is off. And so on, you just have to look for empirical evidence, not speculation.

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: cooperton

Hmm.. Thanks for responding and I like a lot of what you said. But it does ignore the fact that evolution has been proven to occur in modern times.

Adaptations, both on the individual and population level, have been proven. But these adaptations work with genes and alleles that are already in the gene pool. Epigenetics is also a field worth looking into, which involves turning genes on/off and up/down. There is, however, no proof that these mechanisms can go outside their bounds and allow an organism to change into another organism. Squirrels remain squirrels, fruit flies remain fruit flies, mice remain mice, etc. There have been millions of documented generations of fruit flies in the lab, but they cannot artificially evolve them, despite how much they try.

a reply to: cooperton

It is interesting to me that you chose to ignore the other 95% of my post. I was hoping for a persuasive and intelligent answer to my question.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
It would be so easy to just do a simple performance as a gesture of good will and proof of concept, and there is no risk or cost at all. It would convert millions in a single day.

Ahh yes, if only God would prove to us he exists, like maybe manifest in human form through a pure vessel and teach the people along with performing miracles and great feats. But to prove He was God, he would have to do something that has never been done before, like conquer death. Yeah, if someone were to do that I would definitely believe. I would suppose anyone who doesn't believe that really can't be convinced no matter what.

To think of God as your doG would be to think of Him backwards.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: edmc^2

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code to create the synthetic cell?

A computer program. Created by a human on a computer created by machines and humans created from materials made by machines and humans.

See sig.

You almost got it. Now go back before the computer program. Here's a clue from the vid posted by Pahtom - time stamp 1:0.

www.youtube.com...

Maybe Phantom4 knows the answer.

Yeah, it is real surprising that no one thought at the time that such a monumental thing was worth writing about.

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: edmc^2

If you read beyond the end of your nose you would see that it directs you to a YouTube link. In your case, you just don't want to know so any excuse will work.

check your link before you post.

www.youtube.com...

Glad I have it handy.

So Phantom, this the second time I have to ask you:

From your linked video, tell me this since you're so knowledgeable on this subject.

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code for creating the synthetic cell?

Prove me wrong. Life can only create life.

Gampichi is also unable or unwilling to answer my question.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Yeah, it is real surprising that no one thought at the time that such a monumental thing was worth writing about.

Back to you Grim.

Tell me this if you're so knowledgeable on this subject.

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code to create the synthetic cell?

hahaha, using my words as your sig. Nice. Keep it there as I will illuminate you further on what it means.
(Grim - hook line n sinker - wink wink)

But for now, any idea where the source code came from before plugging it to the computer?

a reply to: edmc^2

Didn't your religion say something about questioning god? You said I was a god and now you are being so obtuse.

I had no idea being a god was a simple as explaining how life can be created from a lump of dead meat or a non-living thing.

Really I still feel human.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: edmc^2

Didn't your religion say something about questioning god? You said I was a god and now you are being so obtuse.

I had no idea being a god was a simple as explaining how life can be created from a lump of dead meat or a non-living thing.

Really I still feel human.

hehehe - glad you swallowed the bait - here's the hook.

So what's the answer to my question. This will be very interesting.

What was the SOURCE of the genetic code to create the synthetic cell?

Don't back out now.