Total Posts:59|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

On the Impossibility of Abiogenesis...

B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!


However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:35:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Rather than hacking through this entire post of equivocations and dubious analogies which have been refuted a thousand times, I will address the thesis.

"01: From a primordial soup of disorganized atoms as input a cybernetic constructor as output cannot spontaneously arise"

This thesis has the assumption that the only possibility under naturalism is disorganisation, and a primordial soup. The latter assumption is false (see my abiogenesis debates for why), but more importantly the former is complete BS. Self-organisation and a multitude of ordering mechanisms exist in nature, especially in places for increased capacity for maximising entropy.[https://en.m.wikipedia.org...]

It is factually and empirically false. Because the assumption is false, the entire argument is unsound.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 8:59:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Aggh... not even a paragraph in and he already made a grammatical error-- believe instead of belief. Bummer.. lol
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:02:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

You know what special pleading is right ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:07:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:59:15 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Aggh... not even a paragraph in and he already made a grammatical error-- believe instead of belief. Bummer.. lol

Another Grammar Nazi. I guess you never misspelled anything. Have you? You're so pathetic. How about discussing what was said instead of pointing out spelling errors? You'll look less foolish that way.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:08:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:02:22 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

You know what special pleading is right ?

You're repeating yourself. You do realize how foolish that makes you look. Right? How about discussing what was said in the article? That's what intelligent people do.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:09:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:08:58 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:02:22 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

You know what special pleading is right ?

You're repeating yourself. You do realize how foolish that makes you look. Right? How about discussing what was said in the article? That's what intelligent people do.

"(2) to show that biological systems contain computers. "

This made my brain hurt. :(
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
E2D2
Posts: 156
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:43:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com... : :

I'm positive a stone didn't create a tree or a tree create a human. It simply doesn't make any sense at all. It's all about faith, belief and trust in God that he was the creator of everything.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 9:53:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:09:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:08:58 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:02:22 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

You know what special pleading is right ?

You're repeating yourself. You do realize how foolish that makes you look. Right? How about discussing what was said in the article? That's what intelligent people do.

"(2) to show that biological systems contain computers. "

This made my brain hurt. :(

I'm sorry that your brain is not up to the task of comprehending something so simple. It must really suck to be you. So, when are you going to have an intelligent discussion with me? Are you even capable of such a thing? Your previous replies lead me to seriously doubt it.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:01:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:53:49 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:09:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:08:58 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:02:22 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:01:05 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:56:50 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:46:14 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:30:54 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:27:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:20:06 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

You know what I love about it has to be intelligent designer arguments. They say humans with all their flaws and weakness in this theory just can't exist unless they are the product of intelligent design.

Yet the alleged intelligent designer (God) with all its awesomeness need not have an intelligent designer.

So if something as spectacular as God need not be the product of intelligent design, I don't suppose it to much to suggest that how much more so that our favorite mammal homo sapien need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what I like about comments like yours? You completely fail to address or discuss anything that is presented as evidence, and offer nothing but your uninformed opinion.

As for your comment about God not needing a designer, He is not a part of our physical universe. He is a being of pure Spirit. He doesn't need a designer.

Yes he does cause you see..............GOD IS A COMPUTER !!!!



However, we are not discussing God or religion here. We are discussing the origin of life. The article uses non religious arguments. Nothing more. Can you refute anything he said? I think not. But you are welcome to try. It should be amusing.

Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself in public?

The only thing I am embarrassing is the special pleading nature of intelligent design arguments and God.

So let's recap shall we.........

Humans have to be the result of intelligent design.

God..........an all powerful, all knowing, knowing all calculations, knowing all facts, abilities to create a universe and make a ham sandwich.............need not be the product of intelligent design.

You know what special pleading is right ?

I see that you still refuse to debate anything from the article. I bet you didn't even read it, so your opinion is irrelevant.

You know what special pleading is right ?

You're repeating yourself. You do realize how foolish that makes you look. Right? How about discussing what was said in the article? That's what intelligent people do.

"(2) to show that biological systems contain computers. "

This made my brain hurt. :(

I'm sorry that your brain is not up to the task of comprehending something so simple. It must really suck to be you. So, when are you going to have an intelligent discussion with me? Are you even capable of such a thing? Your previous replies lead me to seriously doubt it.

I guess the computers within me are not working good enough.

COMPUTERS !!!!
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 10:32:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 9:07:13 PM, B0HICA wrote:
Aggh... not even a paragraph in and he already made a grammatical error-- believe instead of belief. Bummer.. lol

Another Grammar Nazi. I guess you never misspelled anything. Have you? You're so pathetic. How about discussing what was said instead of pointing out spelling errors? You'll look less foolish that way.

Yikes! Jumping the gun a bit there broski...

I'm actually very interested in finding out if he does present a good case against abiogenesis because it's never made much sense to me... and yeah it is very difficult to read!

I was just joking..lol
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 11:29:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 10:32:16 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 6/19/2015 9:07:13 PM, B0HICA wrote:
Aggh... not even a paragraph in and he already made a grammatical error-- believe instead of belief. Bummer.. lol

Another Grammar Nazi. I guess you never misspelled anything. Have you? You're so pathetic. How about discussing what was said instead of pointing out spelling errors? You'll look less foolish that way.

Yikes! Jumping the gun a bit there broski...

I'm actually very interested in finding out if he does present a good case against abiogenesis because it's never made much sense to me... and yeah it is very difficult to read!

I was just joking..lol

OH. Well, in that case, carry on. I would go over his thesis and arguments a few times, then read the rest. It is a lot to swallow, but very interesting stuff.
Accipiter
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.
Kreakin
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 6:55:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
To me the article seems to say that abiogenesis whilst incredibly time consuming is inevitable and all that's needed is time to try the combinations when the conditions are right. It points to inevitability.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 9:58:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

From the link:

"My argument, expressed in its simplest form, has two main steps: (1) to show that a computer cannot be generated naturalistically; (2) to show that biological systems contain computers. "

LOL. This was an hilarious attempt for the author to show that biological systems can be equated to computer systems, but of course, computer systems can't arise naturally, hence abiogenesis is false.

Absolutely laughable paper. My sides, there are a splittin'...
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 10:25:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The biggest refutation of abiogenesis is the information problem. Nobody, up until the 1950's, knew that DNA contained information. Information is *essential* for even the simplest cell to function. Information is anything that conveys a message. Sequences of A, T, C, and G are the instructions that determine which proteins are used as structures in the cell. Sequences of A, T, C, and G were immensely complex and specified in the original DNA molecule. Why? Absolutely no reason. There was no chemical or physically necessary reason. The odds of producing a functional *protein* by chance is estimated to be 1 in 10^13,000.
http://vedicilluminations.com...(1).pdf

"One would need a cell to house DNA and RNA but one needs DNA and RNA to code for cell-building, while the ATP Synthase process must be ongoing to power them and it, too, requires DNA to code for it to exist and a cell within to "live."
http://radaractive.blogspot.com...
Accipiter
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 7:07:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

And how is he wrong? You keep making these statements, without any evidence to back them up, and expect us to agree with you? Please explain how he's wrong. You seem to be implying that since we exist, that the theory of abiogenesis is true. I could use the same argument to prove the existence of God, so you're obviously wrong.
Accipiter
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 7:21:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 7:07:36 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

And how is he wrong? You keep making these statements, without any evidence to back them up, and expect us to agree with you? Please explain how he's wrong. You seem to be implying that since we exist, that the theory of abiogenesis is true. I could use the same argument to prove the existence of God, so you're obviously wrong.

You want to bring god in to everything not because it's logical to do so but because you feel science threatens your god for some reason. You people work so hard it's sad that it's in vane, you just end up sounding more and more ridiculous.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 7:31:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 7:21:05 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:07:36 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

And how is he wrong? You keep making these statements, without any evidence to back them up, and expect us to agree with you? Please explain how he's wrong. You seem to be implying that since we exist, that the theory of abiogenesis is true. I could use the same argument to prove the existence of God, so you're obviously wrong.

You want to bring god in to everything not because it's logical to do so but because you feel science threatens your god for some reason. You people work so hard it's sad that it's in vane, you just end up sounding more and more ridiculous.

How can science threaten God? The idea is simply ludicrous. God created the laws of science. And if you believe that God didn't create them, then where did they come from? You don't know. Scientists don't know. So how is your belief any more valid than mine? it isn't.
Accipiter
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 8:01:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 7:31:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:21:05 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:07:36 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

And how is he wrong? You keep making these statements, without any evidence to back them up, and expect us to agree with you? Please explain how he's wrong. You seem to be implying that since we exist, that the theory of abiogenesis is true. I could use the same argument to prove the existence of God, so you're obviously wrong.

You want to bring god in to everything not because it's logical to do so but because you feel science threatens your god for some reason. You people work so hard it's sad that it's in vane, you just end up sounding more and more ridiculous.

How can science threaten God? The idea is simply ludicrous. God created the laws of science. And if you believe that God didn't create them, then where did they come from? You don't know. Scientists don't know. So how is your belief any more valid than mine? it isn't.

Because I'm objective.
B0HICA
Posts: 366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2015 9:44:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/20/2015 8:01:37 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:31:54 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:21:05 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:07:36 PM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 7:02:09 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:21:40 AM, B0HICA wrote:
At 6/20/2015 1:05:21 AM, Accipiter wrote:
At 6/19/2015 8:01:32 PM, B0HICA wrote:
I realize that most of the people on this site are atheists, or agnostic. I'm presenting something here that I want you to take a close look at. It presents a very compelling case as to why a naturalistic origin of life is impossible. Not unlikely. Impossible. It's a pretty long article, and you may have to read it multiple times to get a full understanding of what it says. But if there is anyone here who has any doubts about a Creator, whoever or whatever it might be, one thing is certain. Life cannot create itself, as this article demonstrates.

http://www.uncommondescent.com...

Do you know what the chances are that out of all the atoms in the universe the ones that make up your body came together at this point in time to make you?

It's several orders of magnitude greater an impossibility then abiogenesis.

Your reference is a biased joke. You can't learn anything about abiogenesis, evolution or science from any religious web site.

And yet you refuse to discuss it. You simply try to discredit the source. As I mentioned earlier, he does not use religious arguments. Why don't you at least read it? I know you didn't because you refuse to discuss it. Don't be a coward. Try to refute his argument.

Well he is obviously wrong, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

And how is he wrong? You keep making these statements, without any evidence to back them up, and expect us to agree with you? Please explain how he's wrong. You seem to be implying that since we exist, that the theory of abiogenesis is true. I could use the same argument to prove the existence of God, so you're obviously wrong.

You want to bring god in to everything not because it's logical to do so but because you feel science threatens your god for some reason. You people work so hard it's sad that it's in vane, you just end up sounding more and more ridiculous.

How can science threaten God? The idea is simply ludicrous. God created the laws of science. And if you believe that God didn't create them, then where did they come from? You don't know. Scientists don't know. So how is your belief any more valid than mine? it isn't.

Because I'm objective.

I would say you're close-minded. Do you even admit the possibility that God might exist?