Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Jun 5, 4:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > How did the mass of material that expanded (during the Big Bang) come to be? Energy to mass conversion. As gravitational potential energy is negative, the entire energy of the universe could add up to zero. It is possible to get something from nothing. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Jun 5, 4:06 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <AkU8i.18615$923.11...@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-0306072037260001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <f3vsqa$4ud$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > >> > In article <91q66392u07lc87upssrutbd25pvh9k...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:16:48 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >> <Jason-0306071916490...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >>> In article <fjn6631mv5qk50a9fgnms26tnndi53m...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:30:19 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >>>> <Jason-0306071830200...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >>>>> In article <khm663l8r4e98gh1pcrgcm87mpf4tdp...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:54:47 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >>>>>> <Jason-0306071754470...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >>>>>>> In article > > >> > <1180913480.690671.61...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > >> >>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> >>>>>> ... > > > >> >>>>>>>> Am I? Have you considered how easily those of us here can > > >> >>>>>>>> refute > > >> >>>>>>>> creationist "arguments"? > > > >> >>>>>>>> Hint: we are not all university professors here. > > > >> >>>>>>>> Martin > > >> >>>>>>> Martin, > > >> >>>>>>> It's easy for you to refute my arguments. My master's degree is > > >> >>>>>>> not > > >> >>>>>>> related to biology or a related field. I doubt that you or anyone > > >> >>>>>>> else > > >> >>>>>>> could easily refute the arguments of Dr. D.T. Gish; K. Ham; M. > > >> > Denton or > > >> >>>>>>> any of the staff members that have Ph.D degrees that teach at the > > >> >>>>>>> ICR > > >> >>>>>>> college. > > >> >>>>>> The arguments of the anti-science creationists were shown to be > > >> >>>>>> wrong > > >> >>>>>> decades, even centuries ago. You refuse to accept that fact. > > > >> >>>>>>> You still have spelled out to me how life came about from > > >> >>>>>>> non-life. > > >> >>>>>> You know you are being dishonest here. What god do you worship > > >> >>>>>> that > > >> >>>>>> requires you to lie? > > > >> >>>>>>> One of the other members of this newsgroup told me something like > > >> > this: We > > >> >>>>>>> know that living cells came about from non-life, otherwise, > > > there would > > >> >>>>>>> not be living cells. > > >> >>>>>> Natural chemical reactions allow all of it to have happened. The > > >> >>>>>> fact > > >> >>>>>> that we cannot spell out every step to your satisfaction when you > > >> >>>>>> have > > >> >>>>>> admitted that you don't even understand the problems says a lot > > >> >>>>>> about > > >> >>>>>> you, none of it good. > > > >> >>>>> How did the chemicals that were involved in the chemical reactions > > >> >>>>> come > > >> >>> to be? > > >> >>>> I cannot explain it to you until you take Junior High Chemistry. > > > >> >>>> Are you really so ignorant of science that you have no idea how > > >> >>>> chemical > > >> >>>> reactions work? > > >> >>> I know how chemical reactions work. However, when we done the > > >> >>> experiments, > > >> >>> we already had the chemicals. I am asking how the chemicals came to > > >> >>> be? > > >> >> _All_ chemicals are a result of prior chemical processes. Even a free > > >> >> oxygen molecule has been part of many different molecules in the past. > > >> >> All of the chemical reactions that freed and bound atoms into these > > >> >> molecules was part of a well-understood process. > > > >> >>> Since you have taken at least one chemistry class, you already know > > >> >>> that > > >> >>> chemicals are needed before a chemical reaction to take place. I am > > >> >>> asking > > >> >>> you how those chemcials came to be? > > >> >> Chemicals come from prior chemical processes. Atoms more complex than > > >> >> hydrogen come from stellar fusion. > > > >> > How did the chemicals in the prior chemical processes come to be? You > > >> > mentioned steller fusion--you need to explain what you mean. I was > > >> > taught > > >> > that steller refers to a star or stars. > > > >> Ok. You know in the beginning you had hydrogen. One Proton, one > > >> electron. Basically. To get atoms of higher weight, you have to have > > >> fusion. Atoms "melting" together. You need lots of heat and lots of > > >> pressure for that. Inside a star, for example. > > > >> Star then blows apart after the hydrogen is burned up and the mass gets > > >> too big (depends on starting mass), you get a nova. Current theory is > > >> that the solar system then formed from the debris of one such nova > > >> (IIRC). > > > >> Tokay > > > > This is getting interesting. I should have kept my chemistry text book. > > > How did those stars come to be? > > > This is getting boring, Jason. You are showing yourself to be a dishonest > > debater, much like your hero, "Bullfrog" Gish. To cut to the chase Jason, > > who made god? > > Is this your method of not answering my question? If so, it did not work. > I'll ask the question again: > > How did those stars come to be? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large-scale_structure_of_the_cosmos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_formation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_formation_and_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star Martin Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Jun 4, 4:04 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Bob, > That is true. I was wanting to go even further back into the history of > the solar system than the Big Bang. I want to know how the mass of energy > (that expanded during the Big Bang) came to be. > If you don't know the answer--just tell me. Several people are trying > there best to find reasons to avoid answering this question. One person > was honest enough to say that he did not know the answer. > Jason. You should read the Wikipedia article on the Big Bang, or consult some other reference. Nobody knows what happened before the Big Bang, or even if is it meaningful to talk about "before" the beginning of the universe. It could be that there was another universe before ours that ended when ours began. It could be that there are any number of universes. Or, perhaps, the universe was created by a Creator. We have no scientific evidence one way or the other, because there seems to be no theoretical way to know anything that happened before the Big Bang. What we do know a lot about, is what has happened since the Big Bang. Your questions about where the chemicals and elements that eventually became part of Earth and thence part of life on Earth have been answered. In a general way, we understand every step that led from the Big Bang to our lives today. We don't know every detail of how it happened, and we never will because so much of it happened so long ago. We do have a clear record of human ancestry going back to single- celled creatures. - Bob T. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:53:17 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071553170001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <uHZ8i.15637$FN5.3723@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0406071259540001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <1180940935.656470.164080@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, George >> > Chen <georgechen2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Jun 4, 11:41 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > In article <f3vsi4$3j1$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >> >> > >> >> > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: >> >> > > Jason wrote: >> >> > > > In article <khm663l8r4e98gh1pcrgcm87mpf4tdp...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:54:47 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> > > >> <Jason-0306071754470...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> > > >>> In article >> > <1180913480.690671.61...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> >> > > >>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> ... >> >> > >> >> > > >>>> Am I? Have you considered how easily those of us here can >> >> > > >>>> refute >> >> > > >>>> creationist "arguments"? >> >> > >> >> > > >>>> Hint: we are not all university professors here. >> >> > >> >> > > >>>> Martin >> >> > > >>> Martin, >> >> > > >>> It's easy for you to refute my arguments. My master's degree is >> >> > > >>> not >> >> > > >>> related to biology or a related field. I doubt that you or anyone >> >> > > >>> else >> >> > > >>> could easily refute the arguments of Dr. D.T. Gish; K. Ham; M. >> > Denton or >> >> > > >>> any of the staff members that have Ph.D degrees that teach at the >> >> > > >>> ICR >> >> > > >>> college. >> >> > > >> The arguments of the anti-science creationists were shown to be >> >> > > >> wrong >> >> > > >> decades, even centuries ago. You refuse to accept that fact. >> >> > >> >> > > >>> You still have spelled out to me how life came about from >> >> > > >>> non-life. >> >> > > >> You know you are being dishonest here. What god do you worship >> >> > > >> that >> >> > > >> requires you to lie? >> >> > >> >> > > >>> One of the other members of this newsgroup told me something >> > like this: We >> >> > > >>> know that living cells came about from non-life, otherwise, >> > there would >> >> > > >>> not be living cells. >> >> > > >> Natural chemical reactions allow all of it to have happened. The >> >> > > >> fact >> >> > > >> that we cannot spell out every step to your satisfaction when you >> >> > > >> have >> >> > > >> admitted that you don't even understand the problems says a lot >> >> > > >> about >> >> > > >> you, none of it good. >> >> > >> >> > > > How did the chemicals that were involved in the chemical reactions >> >> > come to be? >> >> > >> >> > > For me to answer your question, define "chemicals". >> >> >> >> > a substance produced by a chemical process or used for producing a >> >> > chemical effect. >> >> >> >> Define "chemical" >> >> >> >> You can't define a word in terms of itself: it's circular. >> > >> > I copied this from my dictionary: >> > >> > chemical--of, relating to, used in, or produced by chemistry. >> > >> > You could find a better definition at Wikipedia. >> > >> > Let's move forward--or should I say "backward in the history of the >> > universe". >> > >> > What is the answer to my question? Let's stop getting bogged down with >> > having to define various words. >> >> Do you play this little game with everyone? If you do as I said to do your >> little game will end. By the way, Jason, who made god? > >You are trying to avoid answering my question. The question is: > >How did the chemicals that were involved in the chemical reactions >come to be? > They came as a result of natural physical processes. Processes that work today in exactly the same way. Your question is totally dishonest and you know it. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 In article <1180995121.699927.174520@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, bramble <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 jun, 19:52, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1180874480.306174.139...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > bramble <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2 jun, 20:04, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <1180776532.883015.87...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, bramble > > > > > Bramble, > > Millions of parents are now home schooling their children or placing them > > in Christian schools where they are free to learn about Christianity, > > evolution and intellegent design. Millions of rich parents send their > > children to college prep. schools. The end result is that the public > > schools in many large cities are failures. I once had a boss that taught > > school in the Harlem district. He told me that most of his students did > > not want to learn and it was difficult to teach the children that did want > > to learn. He told me they had fights at least once a week in that school. > > I have read that children in American public schools now score much lower > > than children from other countries in various subjects--esp. math and > > science. I read that about half of the students that are taking > > engineering classes in most of the American colleges are from countries > > other than America. In other words, our schools are failing. The child > > that won the national spelling contest was not educated at a public > > school. He was educated in a home school. One of the reasons the public > > schools are failing is because many Christian students and the children of > > rich people are not in those public schools. I don't blame those parents > > for giving up on the public schools. It's my guess that public school > > students in the 1940's and 1950's scored higher than children from other > > countries--even in math and science. > > Jason > > Dear Jason. You cannot fool me telling this. In general, kids of > certain middle to high economical level, as well as kids from > religious families are rather well tamed kids. So the degree of order > and aparent labor of the kids in those private schools are far higher > that the lids of very lower class in great cities. The public schools > are trying to keep these kids of marginal poor classes inside the > classrooms. In fact, this simple task is very difficult to achieve. > If most of the kids are kept inside the classrooms, this can be called > a miracle. > So, for religious people to keep these lower class kids in a > disciplinarian grip, you have to create a sort of Nazi or Volshevick > dictatorship. In fact you would have to enable a theocratic > dictatorship to achieve it. But, living in a democracy as we are, it > is very difficult for you to install this type Christian > dictatorship. This is what I think. > The case of home school kids helps to a degree this kids to have some > form of achooling. Better than nothing. But to achieve hight degrees > of intelligence, you need much more than than home schooling and much > more than private schools. To have a real science education you need > a lot more of intelligence than is available in private schools. In > fact, the religious thought is a very difficult obstacle to the > construction of a sound science analysis. If you one day conquer the > state and install your wished Christian dictatorship, in a few > decades, the US will loose the actual scientifical and technological > leadership. You will metamorph into a Christian talivan country in > less than 50 years. > So you cannot blame the public schools, thinking that a Christian > school would be much better in the poor neighborhoods of the great > American cities. > I am thinking now on the Christian achools of Ireland and the south of > Europe. They achieved nothing on the science and technological > front. I remember my own experience in an catholic orphanage. The > begot hate in me against the idea of a god and a Christian faith. I > dont remember anyone of the boys that were caged there, that were > Christian after this horrible experience. > And from where they got their inspiracion to be so cruel? From the > OT. > They were a bunch of real bastards. And the fanatical Evangelicals > of today, remind me of my forlorn childhood. That made my blood > pressure to rise sky soaring. > Bramble Bramble, Thanks for your interesting post. Many of the people from Christian schools and private schools go to state colleges. They usually do as well or even better than the students that graduated from public schools. There is a Catholic college prep school in my town. When they take national tests--the students from that school usually get higher scores than the students from any of the local public high schools. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 In article <f422j1$jqd$03$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <1180951607.644648.239520@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> On 4 Jun., 01:54, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>> In article <1180909414.014982.158...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > >>>> On 4 Jun., 01:07, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>>>> In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >>>>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >>>>>> news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >>>>>>> In article <1180864433.482133.263...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com= > >>> , M=3D > >>>> artin > >>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>>>>>>>> In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >>>>>>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino= > >> Gris > >>>>>>>>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>,= > >> Free > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse= > >> .net=3D > >>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com= > >>> , F=3D > >>>> ree > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impul= > >> se.n=3D > >>>> et>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.c= > >> om>, > >>>>>>> Free Lunch > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.imp= > >> ulse=3D > >>>> .net>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article > >>>>>>> <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that th= > >> ey k=3D > >>>> eep > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> apes and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo= > >> , th=3D > >>>> ey > >>>>>>> kept the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> gorilla > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to e= > >> scap=3D > >>>> e or > >>>>>>>>> throw fecal > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have cre= > >> ated=3D > >>>> and > >>>>>>> designed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than human= > >> s so=3D > >>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not to > >>>>>>>>>>>>> confuse > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quent= > >> in? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gorillas > >>>>>>>>> use fire? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans > >>>>>>> learned to tame > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fire and other animals did not? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wow.... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference= > >> bet=3D > >>>> ween > >>>>>>>>> mankind and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worshi= > >> ps G=3D > >>>> od > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all hu= > >> mans > >>>>>>> worship God. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another trivial difference. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Another major difference: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by = > >> talk=3D > >>>> ing. > >>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some > >>>>>>>>>>>> scientific > >>>>>>>>>>>> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign lan= > >> guag=3D > >>>> e=3D2E So > >>>>>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>>> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited= > >> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> sound. > >>>>>>>>>>>> What was your point again? > >>>>>>>>>>>> Tokay > >>>>>>>>>>> My point is that they can not have converations with peopl= > >> e BY > >>>>>>>>>>> TALKING. > >>>>>>>>>> I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sound= > >> s=2E W=3D > >>>> e are > >>>>>>>>>> communicating by internet. No sound? > >>>>>>>>>>> Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feede= > >> r ou=3D > >>>> tside > >>>>>>>>> her window. > >>>>>>>>>>> When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on= > >> her > >>>>>>>>>>> window to > >>>>>>>>>>> let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. Af= > >> ter =3D > >>>> she > >>>>>>> refilled > >>>>>>>>>>> the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Do= > >> gs l=3D > >>>> et > >>>>>>>>>>> their > >>>>>>>>>>> owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign l= > >> angu=3D > >>>> age. > >>>>>>> Do you > >>>>>>>>>>> think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a= > >> 12 =3D > >>>> year > >>>>>>>>>>> old > >>>>>>>>>>> child? > >>>>>>>>>> Hardly. But that is not the question. > >>>>>>>>>> Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the s= > >> olut=3D > >>>> ion > >>>>>>>>>>> to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a l= > >> ow I=3D > >>>> Q=3D2E > >>>>>>>>>>> jason > >>>>>>>>>> Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? > >>>>>>>>>> You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... > >>>>>>>>> I have provided three separate reasons. > >>>>>>>> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than = > >> that > >>>>>>>> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape co= > >> uld > >>>>>>>> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirem= > >> ent > >>>>>>>> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. > >>>>>>>> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? > >>>>>>>> Martin > >>>>>>> Martin, > >>>>>>> You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it o= > >> ut f=3D > >>>> or > >>>>>>> me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. > >>>>>>> Jason > >>>>>> It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now the= > >> re is > >>>>>> life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-= > >> life. > >>>>>> Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribut= > >> ion =3D > >>>> and > >>>>>> diversity of life on earth. > >>>>> Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life.- Skjul tekst = > >> i an=3D > >>>> f=3DF8rselstegn - > >>>>> - Vis tekst i anf=3DF8rselstegn > >>>> How could it not? > >>> You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me how it happened.- Sk= > >> jul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > >> > >> I do not know. I do know that life did not always exist on this > >> planet. It had to come from some place. Even the Bible describes it > >> as coming from non-life. I also know that there is evidence > >> supporting one possible way that it happened - you know, the evidence > >> that you keep ignoring every time it is posted. Do you have any > >> evidence that life did not arise through natural processes, evidence > >> that you will actually provide? Of course you don't. > > > > Thanks for clearly stating that you "do not know". The advocates of > > creation science do believe that life evolved from non-life. The advocates > > of creation science are of the opinion that God created life from > > non-life. The advocates of creation science have fossil evidence that > > supports creation science. > > WHICH ONE? We gave you countless examples. Now you give one. And DON'T > refer to a book. Or a homepage. Or whatever. DO it. If there is, it > can't be hard. I haven't found any. And I did search. YOU type it in > here. I did. Now you do it. WHAT is this "evidence"? Where are those > fossils? I looked. I did not find it. > > > If you want to read about that evidence, I > > suggest that you read either of these books: > > "Bones of Contention" by M. Lubenow > > "Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No" by D.T. Gish > > No, that won't do. I know what is in those books. It is not evidence of > any kind. > > > Tokay If you choose to believe the books contain no evidence that is your choice. Don't expect me or any of the other advocates of creation science to agree with you. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:11:55 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071411560001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <3tZ8i.15630$FN5.15250@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0406071245080001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... .... >> > Now we are making progress--you claim that the heavy elements were created >> > in supernovae. Explain how that happened? >> >> To you??????? A task more difficult than creating the universe. I have a >> book in my library, "Supernovae and Nucleosynthesis", that only scratches >> the surface. It is 594 pages( I know you're big on pages) of mathematical >> formulas and explanations. If you want to borrow it sometime I'll be more >> than happy to lend it to you. Or you can go to your local library and >> check-out a copy. Yes Jason, I know the basics of how that happened but I >> sure don't plan on explaining to someone as dishonest as you. Say Jason, >> tell me again how Jesus holds together the nucleus of an atom. > >Is this your method of not answering my question? I am trying to go back >into the history of the solar system to the time period where the elements >came into be. I would like to know how those elements came into be. A >related question is: >Do you believe there was a time in the history of the universe when there >were no elements? You have demonstrated that you are not at all interested in learning about science. Your questions appear to be your attempt to ignore the fact that your doctrines are false. -- "Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis Quote
Guest Jim07D7 Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >In article <8s4963pd4sredl8p52pecjgrmqj07q8i1l@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >In article <eks863dj6jo4ue36ojb56berh6svidadf1@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 >> ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >> >> >In article <fua863hpkqknmptenviu23cqom90pmp52h@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 >> >> ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> <...> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I am interested in why you believe Gish, and now assume you have no >> >> >> >> reason, unless you give me one. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >The main reason that comes to mind is what I learned about the >"Cambrian >> >> >> >Explosion" in Dr. Gish's book. I googled that term and found lots >of sites >> >> >> >that had lots of information so you may also want to do your own google >> >> >> >search. >> >> >> > >> >> >> I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I read Stephen Gould's >> >> >> "Wonderful Life" when it was published in paperback in 1990. Does Gish >> >> >> and do you believe the accepted chronology --, that the Cambrian >> >> >> Explosion started at about 530 - 550 million years ago and lasted 10 - >> >> >> 20 million years? >> >> >> >> >> >> http://dannyreviews.com/h/Wonderful_Life.html >> >> > >> >> >I don't know the dates that Dr. Gish used in his book. I donate my old >> >> >books to a used book store. >> >> > >> >> Please read my question again. Part of it was, what do you believe? >> > >> >If that is the date that the experts are certain that it happened, I >> >accept it but can not speak for Dr. Gish. >> > >> The same experts also say that evolution happened. Do you accept that, >> too. > >I accept many of the aspects of evolution theory. I don't accept the >aspects of evolution theory related to common descent and abiogenesis. As >I have told you, I believe that God created mankind; some plants; some >animals. After the creation process was finished, evolution kicked in. >Evolution is mostly about how animals and plants are able to change--esp. >via mutations. > What makes you not accept that God could have created an early life form that evolved to mankind, plants and animals? Quote
Guest Jim07D7 Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >In article <2l5963lfkm7e62b2qqk7fc6tn67ki4re6e@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >In article <o009631ka9guj2ruo1ipj7kance10h90ao@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 >> ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >> >> >I >> >> >know how the advocates of creation science explain how life came to be >> >> >> >> Could you summarize their explanation? >> > >> >God created the solar system. God created mankind; some plants; some >> >animals. After the creation process was finished, evolution took over. I >> >am not an expert on Darwin but have been told that his theory was mainly >> >related to how plants and animals are able to change (mainly as a result >> >of mutations). I accept those aspects of evolution theory. I don't accept >> >the aspects of evolution theory related to common descent and abiogenesis. >> >See my detailed post to Jim for a more detailed response. >> >> I have no need to put God in the theory, as a marker of our current >> limit of knowledge. You seem to need this. > >The problem is that evolutionists do not have answers that are backed up >with evience related to issues about the how life began on this planet. >When I asked for answers, many of the people found reasons to not answer >the questions. Read the other posts in this thread. > Well, we will never have an answer to the next question "but why is that?". How does putting God in the theory, solve this problem? After all, the logical question is, "But why God?" Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 22:05:57 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <d5076317avbqq57vlf3n32jnickcksogql@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 18:08:36 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >I have never researched the >> >life of Steven J. Gould. I seem to recall reading an article in the ICR >> >newsletter about Mr. Gould. >> >> They probably distorted something about him. Nothing he ever said had >> anything to do with creationism. Except the occasional snort. > >I seem to recall that he was mentioned because he refused to debate Dr. >Gish. He was also known for not trying to breathe water or vacuum, and for not trying to walk through brick walls, any of which would have been easier and would have made much more sense. "Dr." Gish is a phony, who wouldn't know the truth if it bit him. Even in the driest desert, an iron nail is indistinguishable from the rest of the sand after 4,000 years. Quote
Guest stoney Posted June 4, 2007 Posted June 4, 2007 On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 12:31:57 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in alt.atheism > >"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > >snip >> >> Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago >> that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took >> place. > > >You might want to keep in mind the fact that there's no evidence a global >flood ever took place. Mind? The cretin hasn't a brain stem much less anything else. -- Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of a convenient means of feeling superior to others. Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:28:19 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >Tapes. Most of the people that attended were Christians. Only a small >number of people clapped when the professor from the local college made an >excellent point but thousands of people clapped when Dr. Gish made a great >point. I can't imagine Gish making even a cogent point about evolution, let alone a great one. (He couldn't make a cogent point about creationism because that would be self-contradictory.) Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0406071536020001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <tgZ8i.15626$FN5.1090@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0406071241560001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <ieU8i.18611$923.7605@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-0306072100120001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <igv663ta5p30ec3uvffhi272aess74bsav@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:49:23 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> <Jason-0306072049230001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >In article <1ku6635spp82qiemt78pub3nggdc1crln7@4ax.com>, Free >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:32:54 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306072032550001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >In article <alt6631ej75cq2s9llbhvdio9ic2f57sv5@4ax.com>, Free >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:57:14 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306071957140001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >In article <3pp6631kon6ea5hg92ij4uqdimal0cgitl@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >Free >> >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:12:07 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306071912070001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <avn663h572filef3evnhqeah8f6ikmpp3a@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >Free >> >> >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:33:46 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <Jason-0306071833470001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ><uvl663lr1nsjuoarku4uqs9mb2gmdufs07@4ax.com>, >> >> > Free Lunch >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:54:00 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <Jason-0306071654000001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article >> >> >> ><1180909414.014982.158970@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> How could it not? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >me >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >how >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >it >> >> >> >> >happened. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Through natural chemical processes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> What other method has evidence to support it? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >How did those chemicals (involved in the chemical >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >processes) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >come >> >> >> >> >to be? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Through other chemical processes. The world is chock >> >> >> >> >> >> >> full >> >> >> >> >> >> >> of >> >> > chemical >> >> >> >> >> >> >> processes and the world before life would have had >> >> >> >> >> >> >> different >> >> >> >ones. It's >> >> >> >> >> >> >> not at all hard for the processes to have happened. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >I am asking you how all those chemicals came to be? >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Chemicals are the natural or artificial result of natural >> >> >> >> >> >> or >> >> > artificial >> >> >> >> >> >> chemical precursors which behave in very consistent >> >> >> >> >> >> manners. >> >> >> >> >> >> Chemical >> >> >> >> >> >> reactions always occur in the same way when the same >> >> >> >> >> >> conditions >> >> >> >> >> >> are >> >> >> >> >> >> present. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >How did all of those things come to be? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Your question betrays a total lack of understanding of >> >> >> >> >> chemistry. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >Would you tell me how the natural or artificial chemical >> >> >> >> >precursors >> >> >> >come to be? >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Find a basic chemistry textbook and start learning about it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Are you stating that you don't know the answers my questions? >> >> >> > >> >> >> No, I'm stating that you have demonstrated enough bad faith in this >> >> >> discussion that I am no longer willing to answer your unending >> >> >> questions >> >> >> when you show no willingness to learn from any of it. >> >> >> >> >> >> You want to believe the lies that the ICR tells you. Go ahead. I >> >> >> cannot >> >> >> stop you. It would be nice if you stopped telling those lies to >> >> >> other >> >> >> people, though. >> >> > >> >> > Be honest--do you or don't you know the answer to my last >> >> > question--I >> >> > will >> >> > give you a hint--it involved a big explosion. >> >> >> >> Now just which big explosion was that, Jason? >> > >> > It's called the Big BANG but it was actually a Big Expansion. >> >> Actually most elements, other than hydrogen and helium, came from the >> explosion of first generation stars. >> > > Thanks--great answer. See my other posts. How did the elements come to > be? Also, was there a time period in the history of the solar system when > there were no elements? Gee thanks Jason. Your approval means a lot to me :-))))). Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <2l5963lfkm7e62b2qqk7fc6tn67ki4re6e@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 > <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >>> In article <o009631ka9guj2ruo1ipj7kance10h90ao@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 >>> <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >>>> >>>>> I >>>>> know how the advocates of creation science explain how life came to be >>>> Could you summarize their explanation? >>> God created the solar system. God created mankind; some plants; some >>> animals. After the creation process was finished, evolution took over. I >>> am not an expert on Darwin but have been told that his theory was mainly >>> related to how plants and animals are able to change (mainly as a result >>> of mutations). I accept those aspects of evolution theory. I don't accept >>> the aspects of evolution theory related to common descent and abiogenesis. >>> See my detailed post to Jim for a more detailed response. >> I have no need to put God in the theory, as a marker of our current >> limit of knowledge. You seem to need this. > > The problem is that evolutionists do not have answers that are backed up > with evience related to issues about the how life began on this planet. Oh bugger > When I asked for answers, many of the people found reasons to not answer > the questions. Read the other posts in this thread. Yes. Read them. The conclusion is obvious. Tokay -- Remember the time he ate my goldfish, and you lied to me and said I never had any goldfish? Then why did I have the bowl Bart? Why did I have the bowl? Milhouse, "The Canine Mutiny" Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0406071613240001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <f42173$tj0$01$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > In article <tgZ8i.15626$FN5.1090@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-0406071241560001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >>> In article <ieU8i.18611$923.7605@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >>> <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >>>> news:Jason-0306072100120001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >>>>> In article <igv663ta5p30ec3uvffhi272aess74bsav@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:49:23 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>> <Jason-0306072049230001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>> In article <1ku6635spp82qiemt78pub3nggdc1crln7@4ax.com>, Free >> >>>>>>> Lunch >> >>>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:32:54 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>>>> <Jason-0306072032550001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>>>> In article <alt6631ej75cq2s9llbhvdio9ic2f57sv5@4ax.com>, Free >> >>>>>>>>> Lunch >> >>>>>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:57:14 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0306071957140001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>>>>>> In article <3pp6631kon6ea5hg92ij4uqdimal0cgitl@4ax.com>, Free >> >>>>>>>>>>> Lunch >> >>>>>>>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:12:07 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0306071912070001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <avn663h572filef3evnhqeah8f6ikmpp3a@4ax.com>, >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Free >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:33:46 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > <Jason-0306071833470001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <uvl663lr1nsjuoarku4uqs9mb2gmdufs07@4ax.com>, >> >>>>> Free Lunch >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:54:00 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> <Jason-0306071654000001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article >> >>>>>>> <1180909414.014982.158970@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How could it not? >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >> >>>>>>>>> happened. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Through natural chemical processes. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What other method has evidence to support it? >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How did those chemicals (involved in the chemical >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes) >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come >> >>>>>>>>> to be? >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Through other chemical processes. The world is chock full >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >> >>>>> chemical >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes and the world before life would have had >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> different >> >>>>>>> ones. It's >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not at all hard for the processes to have happened. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am asking you how all those chemicals came to be? >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Chemicals are the natural or artificial result of natural or >> >>>>> artificial >> >>>>>>>>>>>> chemical precursors which behave in very consistent manners. >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Chemical >> >>>>>>>>>>>> reactions always occur in the same way when the same >> >>>>>>>>>>>> conditions >> >>>>>>>>>>>> are >> >>>>>>>>>>>> present. >> >>>>>>>>>>> How did all of those things come to be? >> >>>>>>>>>> Your question betrays a total lack of understanding of >> >>>>>>>>>> chemistry. >> >>>>>>>>> Would you tell me how the natural or artificial chemical >> >>>>>>>>> precursors >> >>>>>>> come to be? >> >>>>>>>> Find a basic chemistry textbook and start learning about it. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Are you stating that you don't know the answers my questions? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> No, I'm stating that you have demonstrated enough bad faith in >> >>>>>> this >> >>>>>> discussion that I am no longer willing to answer your unending >> >>>>>> questions >> >>>>>> when you show no willingness to learn from any of it. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> You want to believe the lies that the ICR tells you. Go ahead. I >> >>>>>> cannot >> >>>>>> stop you. It would be nice if you stopped telling those lies to >> >>>>>> other >> >>>>>> people, though. >> >>>>> Be honest--do you or don't you know the answer to my last >> >>>>> question--I >> >>>>> will >> >>>>> give you a hint--it involved a big explosion. >> >>>> Now just which big explosion was that, Jason? >> >>> It's called the Big BANG but it was actually a Big Expansion. >> >> Actually most elements, other than hydrogen and helium, came from the >> >> explosion of first generation stars. >> >> >> > >> > Thanks--great answer. See my other posts. How did the elements come to >> > be? Also, was there a time period in the history of the solar system >> > when >> > there were no elements? >> > >> > >> >> Solar system? No. >> >> Tokay > > Please explain your answer. Explain his answer??? You asked a yes or no question. You received your answer, unless of course, you're a troll. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:22:01 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071422010001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: .... >I am not playing a game. Last week, people kept saying that evolution >theory had all the answers. My main interest is related to abiogenesis. How many times have you intentionally and dishonestly ignored people when they told you that abiogenesis precedes evolution. You mock your god. Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <1180998573.169225.7850@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 5, 3:14 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> In article <1180939743.784669.4...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>> <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Jun 4, 10:55 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>> In article <xmJ8i.18103$px2....@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >>>>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Jason-0306071833470001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>>>>>> In article <uvl663lr1nsjuoarku4uqs9mb2gmduf...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:54:00 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>> <Jason-0306071654000...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>>>>> In article > <1180909414.014982.158...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>> How could it not? >>>>>>>>> You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me how it > happened. >>>>>>>> Through natural chemical processes. >>>>>>>> What other method has evidence to support it? >>>>>>> How did those chemicals (involved in the chemical processes) > come to be? >>>>>> Through supernovae's. >>>>> How did supernovaes come to be? >>>> They were stars that exploded because the strength of their fusion >>>> reactions came to exceed the gravitational force that was holding them >>>> together. >>> Are you refering to the Big Bang? >> No, I'm refering to supernovas. >> >> Tell you what: go back to college, take some science courses and come >> back when you know some science and can actually talk to us about >> these matters. >> >> Martin > > Did you notice how many advocates of evolution are finding ways to avoid > answering my simple questions? We DID, you dimwit. You just did not read it. It appears that the advocates of evolution > have a difficult time answering questions related to the history of the > universe. Firstly, because it IS NOT EVOLUTION! you one-cell-brain. Secondly, we DID. As of yet, I have received an answer to this question: > How did the energy mass that expanded (during the Big Bang) come to be? Oh, you did receive an answer? Great. Did you understand it? Guess not. Well, you have the choice. You are either unable to read or unable to comprehend. Which one is it? Tokay -- Remember the time he ate my goldfish, and you lied to me and said I never had any goldfish? Then why did I have the bowl Bart? Why did I have the bowl? Milhouse, "The Canine Mutiny" Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:11:55 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071611550001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <o009631ka9guj2ruo1ipj7kance10h90ao@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >> >> >I >> >know how the advocates of creation science explain how life came to be >> >> Could you summarize their explanation? > >God created the solar system. God created mankind; some plants; some >animals. After the creation process was finished, evolution took over. I >am not an expert on Darwin but have been told that his theory was mainly >related to how plants and animals are able to change (mainly as a result >of mutations). I accept those aspects of evolution theory. I don't accept >the aspects of evolution theory related to common descent and abiogenesis. >See my detailed post to Jim for a more detailed response. > Yet you have not a shred of evidence to support your supposition. Learn. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:04:43 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071604430001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: .... >Bob, >That is true. I was wanting to go even further back into the history of >the solar system than the Big Bang. The solar system is a relative newcomer to the universe. It was not around until billions of years after the Big Bang. >I want to know how the mass of energy >(that expanded during the Big Bang) came to be. There is the real possibility that the universe has a net energy of zero, but there is not yet enough evidence to draw any strong conclusions about that. >If you don't know the answer--just tell me. Several people are trying >there best to find reasons to avoid answering this question. One person >was honest enough to say that he did not know the answer. You bring mockery upon yourself with your lies and dishonest questions. -- "Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f422j1$jqd$03$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <1180951607.644648.239520@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, >>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >>> >>>> On 4 Jun., 01:54, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>> In article <1180909414.014982.158...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>> On 4 Jun., 01:07, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>> In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >>>>>>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>>>>>>>> In article <1180864433.482133.263...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com= >>>>> , M=3D >>>>>> artin >>>>>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >>>>>>>>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino= >>>> Gris >>>>>>>>>>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>,= >>>> Free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse= >>>> .net=3D >>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com= >>>>> , F=3D >>>>>> ree >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impul= >>>> se.n=3D >>>>>> et>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.c= >>>> om>, >>>>>>>>> Free Lunch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.imp= >>>> ulse=3D >>>>>> .net>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>> <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that th= >>>> ey k=3D >>>>>> eep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> apes and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo= >>>> , th=3D >>>>>> ey >>>>>>>>> kept the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gorilla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to e= >>>> scap=3D >>>>>> e or >>>>>>>>>>> throw fecal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have cre= >>>> ated=3D >>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> designed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than human= >>>> s so=3D >>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confuse >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quent= >>>> in? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gorillas >>>>>>>>>>> use fire? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans >>>>>>>>> learned to tame >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fire and other animals did not? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wow.... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference= >>>> bet=3D >>>>>> ween >>>>>>>>>>> mankind and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worshi= >>>> ps G=3D >>>>>> od >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all hu= >>>> mans >>>>>>>>> worship God. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another trivial difference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another major difference: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by = >>>> talk=3D >>>>>> ing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some >>>>>>>>>>>>>> scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign lan= >>>> guag=3D >>>>>> e=3D2E So >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited= >>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was your point again? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tokay >>>>>>>>>>>>> My point is that they can not have converations with peopl= >>>> e BY >>>>>>>>>>>>> TALKING. >>>>>>>>>>>> I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sound= >>>> s=2E W=3D >>>>>> e are >>>>>>>>>>>> communicating by internet. No sound? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feede= >>>> r ou=3D >>>>>> tside >>>>>>>>>>> her window. >>>>>>>>>>>>> When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on= >>>> her >>>>>>>>>>>>> window to >>>>>>>>>>>>> let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. Af= >>>> ter =3D >>>>>> she >>>>>>>>> refilled >>>>>>>>>>>>> the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Do= >>>> gs l=3D >>>>>> et >>>>>>>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>>>>> owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign l= >>>> angu=3D >>>>>> age. >>>>>>>>> Do you >>>>>>>>>>>>> think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a= >>>> 12 =3D >>>>>> year >>>>>>>>>>>>> old >>>>>>>>>>>>> child? >>>>>>>>>>>> Hardly. But that is not the question. >>>>>>>>>>>> Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the s= >>>> olut=3D >>>>>> ion >>>>>>>>>>>>> to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a l= >>>> ow I=3D >>>>>> Q=3D2E >>>>>>>>>>>>> jason >>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? >>>>>>>>>>>> You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... >>>>>>>>>>> I have provided three separate reasons. >>>>>>>>>> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than = >>>> that >>>>>>>>>> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape co= >>>> uld >>>>>>>>>> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirem= >>>> ent >>>>>>>>>> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. >>>>>>>>>> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? >>>>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>>>> Martin, >>>>>>>>> You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it o= >>>> ut f=3D >>>>>> or >>>>>>>>> me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. >>>>>>>>> Jason >>>>>>>> It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now the= >>>> re is >>>>>>>> life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-= >>>> life. >>>>>>>> Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribut= >>>> ion =3D >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> diversity of life on earth. >>>>>>> Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life.- Skjul tekst = >>>> i an=3D >>>>>> f=3DF8rselstegn - >>>>>>> - Vis tekst i anf=3DF8rselstegn >>>>>> How could it not? >>>>> You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me how it happened.- Sk= >>>> jul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >>>> >>>> I do not know. I do know that life did not always exist on this >>>> planet. It had to come from some place. Even the Bible describes it >>>> as coming from non-life. I also know that there is evidence >>>> supporting one possible way that it happened - you know, the evidence >>>> that you keep ignoring every time it is posted. Do you have any >>>> evidence that life did not arise through natural processes, evidence >>>> that you will actually provide? Of course you don't. >>> Thanks for clearly stating that you "do not know". The advocates of >>> creation science do believe that life evolved from non-life. The advocates >>> of creation science are of the opinion that God created life from >>> non-life. The advocates of creation science have fossil evidence that >>> supports creation science. >> WHICH ONE? We gave you countless examples. Now you give one. And DON'T >> refer to a book. Or a homepage. Or whatever. DO it. If there is, it >> can't be hard. I haven't found any. And I did search. YOU type it in >> here. I did. Now you do it. WHAT is this "evidence"? Where are those >> fossils? I looked. I did not find it. >> >> >> If you want to read about that evidence, I >>> suggest that you read either of these books: >>> "Bones of Contention" by M. Lubenow >>> "Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No" by D.T. Gish >> No, that won't do. I know what is in those books. It is not evidence of >> any kind. >> >> >> Tokay > > If you choose to believe the books contain no evidence that is your > choice. Don't expect me or any of the other advocates of creation science > to agree with you. > > lol You don't even know what is in that books. You said so. So, while other "proponents of creation science" might have a point (they don't), you have not. You don't even know their arguments. Tokay -- Remember the time he ate my goldfish, and you lied to me and said I never had any goldfish? Then why did I have the bowl Bart? Why did I have the bowl? Milhouse, "The Canine Mutiny" Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 How did the elements come into be? Was there a time in the history of the solar system where the elements did not exist? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:50:51 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0406071350520001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1180965414.666161.117810@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 4, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > >You are saying it very well. I no longer have a copy of Dr. Gish's book >> > > >and can not provide you with the answers that you are seeking. If >you want >> > > >to read about the fossil evidence that supports creationism, you >will have >> > > >to read either of the books mentioned above. Another option would be to >> > > >visit the ICR website and type "fossil" or "fossil evidence" into their >> > > >search engine. >> > > >jason >> > >> > > I am interested in why you believe Gish, and now assume you have no >> > > reason, unless you give me one. >> > >> > The main reason that comes to mind is what I learned about the "Cambrian >> > Explosion" in Dr. Gish's book. I googled that term and found lots of sites >> > that had lots of information so you may also want to do your own google >> > search. >> >> How is that evidence for creation? >> >> Often evolution gets a jumpstart following a major extinction. This >> is a well known phenomenon: if 99.9%, say, of all lifeforms are killed >> in, say, an asteroid collision then the surviving species are VERY >> different from what was typically seen before. So evolution is not >> always gradual. Stephen J. Gould was first to point out periods of >> rapid speciation. The extinction-explosion idea has since been >> proposed. >> >> Martin > >Martin, >Stephen J. Gould has his ideas about the Cambrian Explosion. Dr. Gish and >ICR have their own ideas about the Cambrian Explosion. The question was >about Dr. Gish's evidence. Gish has no evidence. Gish is nothing but a con man who learned how to sucker you. You are his mark. He's a happy man. You are his victim. Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > How did the elements come into be? > > Was there a time in the history of the solar system where the elements did > not exist? > > I answered. Tokay P.S.: In the same spirit of this post. -- Remember the time he ate my goldfish, and you lied to me and said I never had any goldfish? Then why did I have the bowl Bart? Why did I have the bowl? Milhouse, "The Canine Mutiny" Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Kope wrote: > i am a radical muslim please read my blog, read how islam will win > the clash of civilization. > > http://www.xanga.com/hfghj23458654fgha > > > Hardly Tokay -- Remember the time he ate my goldfish, and you lied to me and said I never had any goldfish? Then why did I have the bowl Bart? Why did I have the bowl? Milhouse, "The Canine Mutiny" Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0406071422010001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <3tZ8i.15629$FN5.3095@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0406071240400001@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <mdU8i.18610$923.16746@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-0306072049230001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <1ku6635spp82qiemt78pub3nggdc1crln7@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:32:54 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> <Jason-0306072032550001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >In article <alt6631ej75cq2s9llbhvdio9ic2f57sv5@4ax.com>, Free >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:57:14 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306071957140001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >In article <3pp6631kon6ea5hg92ij4uqdimal0cgitl@4ax.com>, Free >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:12:07 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306071912070001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >In article <avn663h572filef3evnhqeah8f6ikmpp3a@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >Free >> >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:33:46 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0306071833470001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <uvl663lr1nsjuoarku4uqs9mb2gmdufs07@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >Free >> >> >> >> >> >> >Lunch >> >> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:54:00 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > <Jason-0306071654000001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article >> >> > <1180909414.014982.158970@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> How could it not? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >how >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >it >> >> >> >happened. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Through natural chemical processes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> What other method has evidence to support it? >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >How did those chemicals (involved in the chemical >> >> >> >> >> >> >processes) >> >> >> >> >> >> >come >> >> >> >to be? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Through other chemical processes. The world is chock full >> >> >> >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> >> >> chemical >> >> >> >> >> >> processes and the world before life would have had >> >> >> >> >> >> different >> >> > ones. It's >> >> >> >> >> >> not at all hard for the processes to have happened. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >I am asking you how all those chemicals came to be? >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> Chemicals are the natural or artificial result of natural or >> >> >> >> >> artificial >> >> >> >> >> chemical precursors which behave in very consistent manners. >> >> >> >> >> Chemical >> >> >> >> >> reactions always occur in the same way when the same >> >> >> >> >> conditions >> >> >> >> >> are >> >> >> >> >> present. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >How did all of those things come to be? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Your question betrays a total lack of understanding of >> >> >> >> chemistry. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Would you tell me how the natural or artificial chemical >> >> >> >precursors >> >> > come to be? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Find a basic chemistry textbook and start learning about it. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Are you stating that you don't know the answers my questions? >> >> >> >> Too ask a question such as where do the chemicals come from, is >> >> stating >> >> that >> >> you don't know how to ask a question. >> > >> > Are you trying to find a reason to avoid answering my question? >> >> I answered your damn question, several times. >> >> > My goal is >> > to keep going back until I find out how the chemicals, atoms and >> > related >> > atomic materials came to be. >> >> That is precisely why I said that you didn't know how to ask a question. >> >> >> > One person mentioned that an exploding star >> > or stars were the source of some or all of the chemicals. >> >> That was me. >> >> > If that is true, >> > how did the chemicals and atomic particles in those stars come to be. >> >> Oh, its true alright and even if it wereb't true, you wouldn't know it. >> >> > We >> > can't keep going back if we bogged down with criticisms of how I am >> > asking >> > the questions. >> > Jason >> >> Let me help you out, Jason. You ask the question, "where did all of the >> material originate that formed our universe of today"? See Jason, you >> thought you were playing a game but you only showed that you didn't know >> how >> to play the game. We know where the material from the universe >> originated, >> we don't know the why. We'll leave the why up to you religionists and >> we'll >> concentrate on the how. You know Jason, how did god create the universe >> by >> using only his voice? Did the electrons and quarks assemble themselves at >> the sound of his voice? How did that work, Jason? > > I am not playing a game. Last week, people kept saying that evolution > theory had all the answers. Please give me a cite for your comment. The only person I can see who might have thought that, was you. > My main interest is related to abiogenesis. If that is your interest then you are woefully inadequate in the research and results from abiogenesis. Evolution theory works with or without abiogenesis, as I explained to you many posts back. > I > know how the advocates of creation science explain how life came to be but > my college biology professor (in 1971) was not able to tell us how the > elements came into be. Evidently you know precious little about how life came to be, from a creation point of view. Did the quarks and electrons assemble themselves at the command from god? Yes or no will suffice. > Several years ago, someone stated in a magazine > article that the Big Bang was how the solar system came into be. That was > helpful until I realized there were still unanswered questions such as: > How did that mass (that expanded) come into be? If evolutionists can not > answer those questions, it means to me that the theory has no validity. > However, if evolutionists are able to provide answers (and not guesses), > the theory does have validity. > Jason Again, evolution theory has absolutely nothing to do with abiogenesis. Jason, the equations of general relativity predict the big bang and show composition of the matter that would result from the big bang. This was before the big bang theory was formulated. What the equations don't show is the sound of god's voice assembling the big bang. Amazing, isn't it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.