It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

page: 37
30
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
reply to post by SuperFrog
 



It is truly laughable that you think Living Organisms springing from non living matter has been proven in a lab.


First off, nobody said that. And second, the idea that life spontaneously generates hasn't been believed in almost 300 years, so you're barking up the wrong tree.

Organic molecules, including RNA, can and do spontaneously assemble. So can peptide structures and microspheres. That's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt and isn't even up for debate.

Just because we don't know the answer for sure yet doesn't automatically mean life was created. You're falling into the trap all creationists fall into.



Even in the lab tests they are doing their best to provide the "goldilocks" conditions that they think need to be present to conceive Life out of non living matter. Thier efforts represent outside intervention and direction and would not mimic the environment of a completely untouched system being governed by random collisions of chemicals.


We've observed the formation of organic molecules in space. If they can form in those temperatures, they can form anywhere, spontaneously. All that's needed is for any protein structures to be able to hold their shape.


Even with thier best efforts at creating the perfect circumstances... there is absolutly no evidence that what they claim to have happened... could ever have happened. It is blind belief in non-scientific speculation.. in short it is faith in the impossible.


Nobody said anything about "perfect" conditions. There's no such thing. What they tried to do is replicate, with the knowledge available, what the early Earth might have been like. Without a time machine, there's no way to know for sure so they may not have been entirely correct in that--but no matter which set of experiments you point to, regardless of the proposed atmosphere and heat source, organic molecules and even amino acids formed spontaneously from the mix.

You need to do some reading. Read the experiments of Eigin, Miller and Urey, Oro, Fox, Haldane, Shapiro, Aristotle. Learn what they did and did not think. Learn about what they've done and about how far we've come in just a few short years.

I think we're going to find that wherever life can be, it is. Life finds a way to exist and survive. Just today it was announced that they've found microorganisms in one of the harshest environments on Earth, the Atacoma Desert. They've also been found, along with fungi and lichens, in Antarctica. They've been found in our atmosphere and on the space station.


I also have Faith in what according to science is impossible, that our Universe was Created out of nothing. I simply have Faith in a God who is able to make the impossible, possible. At least I am honest and open minded.


So, if the universe was created and something can't come from nothing, who created God?


You run and hide from the argument.

You hide behind "its already proven science" or "its already been discussed"

You are deathly afraid of your nonsense theory being exposed for what it really is.


No, we're laughing at your stupidity and gullibility, your paranoia and your delusion.

Your attitude is "I don't want it to be true therefore it isn't." That's a child's view of the world. It's sure not a scientific one.




posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SoulReaper
 


Wow, after all that, after ducking all of my questions, you come along with the tired old (and utterly refuted) "god of the gaps" argument? I knew I could smell it coming


"If you can't beat 'em, just make it up as you go along"

Bottom of barrel, meet SoulReaper. SoulReaper, meet bottom of the barrel. I'm sure you'll get along just swell. Happy scraping!

One last thought: who created god, eh? And if you answer "he always existed" then I can just turn around and say "life always existed". It most likely hasn't, but at least we have evidence for life, unlike god. There, occam's razor just removed god from the equation.
edit on 11-6-2012 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
God is not on trial here, and cannot be put on trial via Science. Science is not able to dis prove God and never will be able to. After all science is merely discovering what God has created and how it works. The mechanisms present in Creation cannot possible prove that they were not indeed created.


And religion is able to prove God does exists?


There is no reason to prove/disprove God, but let's see what religion said for synthetic cell research:




However critics, including some religious groups, condemned the work, with one organisation warning that artificial organisms could escape into the wild and cause environmental havoc or be turned into biological weapons. Others said Venter was playing God.


Source: Guardian.co.uk



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
God is not on trial here, and cannot be put on trial via Science. Science is not able to dis prove God and never will be able to. After all science is merely discovering what God has created and how it works. The mechanisms present in Creation cannot possible prove that they were not indeed created.

the nonsense of big bang/ abiogenesis/evolutionary rise of humans is on trial via the Scientific method and logical deduction. It has been found untenable, unworkable, and not credible.

Soul


So, you don't believe what progressive men that have created such wonderful things such as heart transplants and cellular regeneration have to say about biology, and the beginning of man using machines created from our continued research into the very reality of existence..

..but some text written thousands of years ago by people that believed in VAMPIRES is somehow more credible to you.

Interesting theory.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperFrog
Couple years back my cousins wife had interesting talk with her fellow employee about St. Nicholas, where girl in her 20's was offended by someone who said that St. Nicholas does not exist and yet she has proof, all the gifts she got from him...

Tell me, is that normal for someone who is 20-some years old?

There is no education/medication that can help that young mind.


The St Nicholas example is not the same as believing in God- we know that we invent Santa Claus as we actually leave the presents lying under the tree- there is no such proof either way for God



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
I suggest you do something that Atheists are deathly afraid of. EDUCATE yourself on the discoveries of modern Biology.


Why do you assume we're all atheists? Atheism =/= Science. That's almost an ad hominem. Also, I am studying biology. I don't think you have, though.



Originally posted by SoulReaper
You have no ability to provide even a basic explination for how life could spring from non living matter.


That's exactly what the video I posted shows. A theoretical model for the beginning of life. It explains how, through natural processes, self-replicating cell-like structures could come into existence. You did watch it, right?



Originally posted by SoulReaper
Life is complex, even so called "simple" organisms are more complex then anything man has been able to create. So its not suprising that you are incapable of doing what I ask


That's a fallacy. We couldn't create nylon until the 1900's. Does that mean that nylon was impossible? No, it simply means we hadn't achieved it yet. Just because we haven't done something doesn't mean that it's impossible. We make discoveries every day.



Originally posted by SoulReaper
NAME one.. I dare you... you can't come up with one example of a scientific discovery that cannot be shown to work hand in hand with a creator. Your all bark with nothing behind it.


This isn't a real question. Intelligent Design basically implies that god has a hand in every process. Depending on your definition of "creator", your challenge may be irrefutable in the first place. It's simply not a fair question.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
You guys are a real riot,.

You all still run and hide from the facts of modern biology. A living Organism is not just a jumbled together mess of randomly organized chemicals.

Its amazing that you actually think observing simple chemical reactions occurring spontaneously gives legs to abiogenesis as a theory/ hypothosis (i really don't care what you want to call it).

Nobody is denying that chemicals interact and molecules join together in an observable and thus in a some what predictable manner on their own without direction.

The process of how those Chemicals managed to find themselves in the complex structures found in even the smallest self sufficient living organisms is what must be explained by the anti-theist for their fairy tale to even be considered credible.

And they are not even close to providing any kind of cohesive thought on this matter.

You people actually believe that all the information, structure and mechanisms found in the living cell arose out of MUTATIONS...

That is the God of the anti-theist... Mutations make the impossible, all of a sudden possible with no further explanation or evidence needed.

You guys have Faith that an abnormality which almost always cripples or kills life.. somehow magically got it right millions of times even though this cannot be proven. In fact they can't even theorize on paper what kind of order the mutations could have taken to "Evolve" the first simple cells into thriving well engineered complex organisms that we see today.

It doesn't work to develop one system within the living cell one at a time slowly... The CELL DIES if all its necessary mechanisms are not functioning as designed.

This sort of interdependent complex system such as what is found in the living cell is the DEATH of the non-theist fairy tale.

You can sit there in denial all day and spout off the typical Atheist cop outs such as

" well you believe in God so your an idiot"
" well science has already proven Evolution(I assume you peeps mean in the limited scope that I believe in) so we don't have to prove anything else"
" I am so much smarter and more educated and more intelligent then you are... so what I think is always right just because I think it."

Or any other manner of insult and mockery that you guys use to take the attention away from the fact that your favorite secular fairy tale has been exposed and laid to waste by modern discoveries in science and biology.

I still have not heard an intelligent, cohesive alternative for God with regards to two questions. First the Origin of matter, energy, time, and space. Secondly, an alternative to the Origin of Life if not the direct design of God.

It just so amuses me that you guys are so insistent that Science has provided an alternative answer for these questions that is actually plausible and can withstand the rigors of observation and logical thinking.

As of right now Your belief that there was something OTHER then God as the source for all things and life in particular is born out of complete Faith that there must be some other explanation.

It is not in any way born out of what science has Proven.

I'd be very impressed with the Non-theist who can man up and admit that their current worldview is based on Faith without Proof.

As of right now, God is a viable Faith based explanation as the Origin source. The fact that the non-theist so struggles to admit this is a tell tale sign of commitment to Dogma. There just can't be a God... it is an unacceptable idea, thus they will rest their faith in whatever alternative is presented to them by secular society, no matter how incredible that alternative might be.

Open your eyes and see the world for what it really is. Don't be afraid to keep your mind open to all possibilities. I am certainly open to your ideas.. honestly I am... but if you keep trying to tell me that the complexity of the Living Organism arose out of a chemical soup on the back of millions of "fortunate" mutations... I'm afraid I'll just have to keep laughing at your delusions.

Really that can't be the best that secular society can come up with.. or is it??

Soul



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperFrog


SR, did you note that all references in your link are old (mostly 60's and 70's and few newer ones). 13 years is long period in science, don't you think so?




Amazing isn't it... The theory has been on life support for such a long time and yet secular society just refuses to pull the plug and let it die.

You know why people still buy into this delusion? Its because they can't come up with anything better... They are at a complete loss to provide explanations for what they have found without acknowledging Gods hand in it.

And acknowledging that God may exist is not an option.

It is like a famous Atheist once said.. "If it comes down to believing in God or believing in the impossible, I choose to believe in the impossible."

Can't remember who said that, but I remember reading it somewhere.

I'd say that sums up the non-theist attitude quite nicely.

Soul
edit on 11-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper

The process of how those Chemicals managed to find themselves in the complex structures found in even the smallest self sufficient living organisms is what must be explained by the anti-theist for their fairy tale to even be considered credible.


Yes, the video on Szosatak work is still light years from even the simplest cell. Also it must be noted that Szostaks favoured hypothesis "The RNA world hypothesis" has recently taken a blow to it's credibility.

The whole chicken and egg argument is as strong as ever. Looks like proteins were already on the scene. This completely undermines the proposed mechanisms in that video.
phys.org...


"I'm convinced that the RNA world (hypothesis) is not correct," Caetano-Anollés said. "That world of nucleic acids could not have existed if not tethered to proteins."


Back to the drawing board I'm afraid.
edit on 11-6-2012 by squiz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SoulReaper
 





As of right now, God is a viable Faith based explanation as the Origin source.


So to sum up your entire post:

1) You don't consider abiogenesis true...which is the same opinion scientists have. That's why they call it a HYPOTHESIS in the first place. It isn't a proven theory. Yet for some funny reason the fact that it hasn't been fully proven somehow makes you really angry because you're not satisfied with the evidence they have so far.

2) You call a belief in god a "faith based explanation"...ergo something that has no objective evidence as backup. But somehow, that's perfectly ok all of a sudden.

Hypocrite much?



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Poe's Law in 3... 2... 1...

2nd line



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
You guys are a real riot,.

You all still run and hide from the facts of modern biology. A living Organism is not just a jumbled together mess of randomly organized chemicals.


How do you know? Have you ever had your hands inside of a dead human body?


Its amazing that you actually think observing simple chemical reactions occurring spontaneously gives legs to abiogenesis as a theory/ hypothosis (i really don't care what you want to call it).


It's amazing that you think a God did it.


Nobody is denying that chemicals interact and molecules join together in an observable and thus in a some what predictable manner on their own without direction.


I was excited when I read this..


The process of how those Chemicals managed to find themselves in the complex structures found in even the smallest self sufficient living organisms is what must be explained by the anti-theist for their fairy tale to even be considered credible.


.. then I read this.

Yeah, the guy professing that God did it is telling me what is and isn't a fairy tale. Well played.


And they are not even close to providing any kind of cohesive thought on this matter.


No cohesive thought..


You people actually believe that all the information, structure and mechanisms found in the living cell arose out of MUTATIONS...


.. a wild cohesive thought appears.


That is the God of the anti-theist... Mutations make the impossible, all of a sudden possible with no further explanation or evidence needed.


Yeah, funny how we discovered genetics and mutations and then just never did any more study into it ever again. Like we simply rely on a single book to tell us everything we need to know about it..


You guys have Faith that an abnormality which almost always cripples or kills life.. somehow magically got it right millions of times even though this cannot be proven. In fact they can't even theorize on paper what kind of order the mutations could have taken to "Evolve" the first simple cells into thriving well engineered complex organisms that we see today.


I know, right?! That abnormality that almost always cripples or kills.. it's like mutation could never be beneficial.. and if it were.. it's not like it could happen over only a few generations, right?

en.wikipedia.org...


It doesn't work to develop one system within the living cell one at a time slowly... The CELL DIES if all its necessary mechanisms are not functioning as designed.


Sure, it does now... do you know how long it might take to develop that kind of system through mutation and chemical reaction alone? Hundreds of millions of years, I would guess.




You tried, mate, you really tried.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperFrog

And religion is able to prove God does exists?


There is no reason to prove/disprove God, but let's see what religion said for synthetic cell research:



Religion isn't interested in Proving God to anyone. Religion is interested in Presenting God to everyone.. it requires Faith to Believe in something that you cannot see.

According to Christians, the only way to Have this sort of Faith is by an act of God himself. Causing his spirit to indwell the believer and implant Faith from Within. Thus our Faith is not born out of exterior Proof, but rather inward transformation according to Gods Will.

Thus if he is not at work in you... you will not just be unwilling to have Faith in Him, you are in fact incapable of it. Yet He will prove Himself to all on that day of days at the end of the Ages. When you are quickened to the judgement after death, you will know the truth of the matter.. though I hope for your sake you embrace him sooner.

Of course you don't believe a word of that and you won't until it is Proven to you. You are asking the wrong people to prove God to you... That is not our task... God will take care of that himself in his own timing.

As for Synthetic Cells.. I Say go for it, why would that concern me? How many of those Synthetic Cells created themselves? What do you think they are going to prove about the origin of life?


Soul
edit on 11-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


lol... I'm not angry.. where did you get that idea?

I'm quite amused at the complete lack of response to my questions.... you guys ALWAYS resort to insulting Faith in God and trying to shine the light on your opponent instead of actually considering the problems in your own belief system.

Its like the Genetic Mutations somehow eliminated self introspection in the non-theist mind... (*grins*.. just kidding of course)

I'm completely honest about my belief system. It is born out of Faith.. I don't deny it, I proclaim it. I'm not afraid to admit that I can't prove everything I think via science experiments.

I do however find great enjoyment pointing out the same reliance in unproven beliefs on the other side of this argument. Who is delusional here?

Soul
edit on 11-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


So Furbs you fail once again to provide any sort of plausible, cohesive alternative to God as the origin source of matter, energy, space, time, and life.

I can quite understand your unwillingness to believe in God.

What I am more interested in is your insistence on attempting to prop up untenable theories in His place.

Why not just admit that God may indeed be a viable option, but that you refuse to believe it, thus you are still searching for an alternative?

That would be an honest statement.

I can be honest. I believe in God based on my Faith and I've found nothing presented by Science that contradicts what I know of him. I'm completely open to considering your view of things, what is your view of an Origin source again?? If you have articulated it, I must have missed it.

I'm not interested in accepting what you have to say just because it is you saying it. I'm just not that impressed with your intellect.. sorry
But I will consider what you have to say as long as you are not asking me to believe that the Universe accomplished miraculous things while at the same time claiming that you don't believe in the miraculous. That to me is the ultimate hypocrisy.

God provides a source for making the impossible.. possible. It must be believed by Faith, yet it is a viable and cohesive world view non the less. If you cannot acknowledge this, I have to question your intellectual integrity.

Soul



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SoulReaper
 



Wow Soulreaper, re "I can be honest. I believe in God based on my Faith and I've found nothing presented by Science that contradicts what I know of him. I'm completely open to considering your view of things," that's a lovely comment. It has given you my repect. I guess you have the conviction of trying to "save" unbelievers and that's admirable too. Even though I see your faith as blind obedience in something that has to me, no proof, I like your sincerity and if I knew how, I would give you a flag.

o please settle for a double thumbs up

Regards
Steve




posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Ahh I almost missed you there in between the other posts.

First, I'm not claiming that science Proves Gods existence. The Physical world can Never Prove that the non physical world does or does not exist.

Second, I'm inclined to believe that considering the Eternal, Infinite State that God exists in. There is no such thing as Time as we comprehend it. Thus it would be as God says, that he has no beginning and no end.

So just as the human mind cannot understand the Limit of Infinity (because by its definition it has no limit) So then we cannot comprehend God in terms of limits or beginnings and ends.

It is our plane of existence that is bound to the material world and within time that such an argument is valid. Such is the nature of our exploration of what exists via Science.

Thus God cannot be subjected to the scientific method of determining quantities and limits and how things change over Time. For he by his very nature can not be quantified, has no limits and does not change, he is immutable, infinite, and eternal.

So when you can explain to me where infinity ends, then you will be able to answer your own question of where God begins or ends.

In short, from the view of the Christian, your question doesn't even make sense, it does not apply to our God and contemplation of the actual nature of Gods existence is considered beyond us. That is we are not capable of understanding him fully, much less, be able to explain him fully to anyone else. I readily admit that I cannot comprehend the infinite.

Soul


edit on 11-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-6-2012 by SoulReaper because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
reply to post by Furbs
 


God provides a source for making the impossible.. possible. It must be believed by Faith, yet it is a viable and cohesive world view non the less. If you cannot acknowledge this, I have to question your intellectual integrity.

Soul



A very nice presentation of something that is usually packaged in four words: "god of the gaps."

Anything that has zero evidence to back it is simply "What I believe". There is zero tolerance for new data.

Ongoing scientific inquiry is : "To the best of our current knowledge."
It has the admittance that the knowledge can change built right in.

Faith is real, I see it everyday. However believing is not the same as questioning, it is in fact a refusal to question. Therefore, not to be trusted as it does a disservice to the betterment of mankind.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoulReaper
reply to post by Furbs
 


So Furbs you fail once again to provide any sort of plausible, cohesive alternative to God as the origin source of matter, energy, space, time, and life.


It wasn't rhetoric.

Have you ever had your hand inside of a human body? The human back is the most compelling argument against Intelligent Design that I have ever seen. The idea that a benevolent creator would create a biological entity that stands upright with the same biological structuring of a quadruped is flawed design. It is leads to undo stresses on the back that just aren't present in other apes.

Why would a God create such a flawed system if the rest of the system works so magnificently? Chemistry and Physics are very orderly. Very structured. Why is Biology so varied and malleable and full of impractical outcomes?

I readily admit that Science hasn't given us all of the answers, but I contend that "God" hasn't given us any.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


Never had any trouble with my Back


But actually Christians don't think the World is Perfect, sorry to shatter your paradigm there. We think the world is corrupted, fallen, and full of imperfection.

I had a good friend die yesterday 40 days after a bone marrow transplant attempt. He was 32, has suffered with crohn's disease for years among other ailments prior to his bone marrow turning on him. He died young, after much suffering, leaving behind a wife and 3 kids. And he went out Praising God for the life that he lived.

Christians believe that suffering is inherent to this world and that both the world and its inhabitants are in need of redemption. That things will one day be restored to perfection.

It is not however part of our world view that there are not flaws present in our bodies.

Soul




top topics



 
30
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join