Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On May 30, 12:56 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > >>> Martin, > > >>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. > > >> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" > > > >> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as > > >> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. > > > >> Any more lies to spew? > > > > Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > non-life? > > > Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living > > things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has > > no validity. > > It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer? It's a meaningless question because you will just ignore any answer he writes. I resent being asked to answer a question, spending hours writing my answer and then getting ignored until finally after I've posted my response five times you reply with "I read it" but don't respond to anything I said. What's the point of bothering with you? Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On May 30, 2:36 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Did you read the entire article? I read it and the author, David Buckna, > done an excellent job. He mentioning the bias that advocates of creation > science have had to deal with in getting their articles published in > journals. In some cases, they even had to alter their articles to get them > published. That's normal. That's why it's called "peer review". Are you so ignorant as to believe that any scientist can get papers published without having to pass through the peer review process? It's that very process that keeps science honest. If religion had a peer review process then your entire religion would have been a non-starter. > One of the editors even mentioned that they did not print > letters from the advocates of creation science. I was pleased to learn > that some of the advocates of creation science have been able to get their > articles published. Do you admit that some of the advocates of creation > science know just as much about science as the advocates of evolution? Knowing about science and actually doing science are not the same thing. The scientific method begins with a testable hypothesis that can then be either demonstrated or shown to be false by experiment. If a creationist proposes God as his hypothesis then he would have to be willing to test whether God exists and accept the conclusion of whatever experiment he has been able to design. You can't be a scientist and follow any dogmatic belief and religious beliefs are dogmatic beliefs, ie beliefs that people are expected to uphold regardless of what the evidence might say. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On May 30, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180501328.258832.5...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 11:33 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1180490981.530250.223...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 30, 10:22 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1180487516.728068.304...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 30, 7:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > The reality is that the advocates of evolution and abiogenesis > have NO > > > > > > > evidence of how the first living cells came to be. > > > > > > > Stop lying. I've posted this three times already. Could somebody let > > > > > > me know if this post is getting through or not? Perhaps Jason has > > > > > > killfiled me. > > > > > > > In 1953, the Miller-Uley experiment showed that amino acids could > > > > > > form > > > > > > spontaneously from elements present in the "primorial soup". (See > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment) Other > > > > > > experiments showed that bilipid membranes can form spontaneously. > > > > > > (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer) Sidney Fox's > > > > > > research showed that amino acids can spontaneously form protein > > > > > > chains. (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox) Protein > > > > > > chains can then guide the formation of RNA chains just as RNA chains > > > > > > are known to guide the formation of protein chains. (See > > > > > >http://www.hhmi.org/news/lindquist2.html). German scientists have > > > > > > already produced molecules in the laboratory that are capable of > > > > > > reproducing themselves and are therefore alive. (See > > > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm). > > > > > > > Primative cells would have formed as a way to prevent the contents of > > > > > > the cell from drying out. (See > > > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm > > > > > > > ). The simplest cells would have been prokaryote cells (See > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote) which would have been the > > > > > > ancestors of modern bacteria and archaea while more advanced > > > > > > eukaryotic cells (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryotic) would > > > > > > have been the ancestors of modern animal, plant and fungis cells. > > > > > > Eukaryotic cells could have formed through a process known as viral > > > > > > eukaryogenesis (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis > > > > > > ) in which a virus forms an endosymbiosic relationship with a host > > > > > > prokaryote cell. (See > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory > > > > > > > > > > > ) Mitochondria and plastids are also believed to have arisen as a > > > > > > result of endosymbiosis, the evidence being that mitochondria and > > > > > > plastids share characteristics with bacteria cells, the only > > > > > > difference being that they cannot survive independent of the rest of > > > > > > the cell, but that's fine because human cells cannot survive > > > > > > independent of the rest of the body either. In both cases, the parts > > > > > > have evolved to depend on the whole. > > > > > > > Most of this information has been posted already. You would have > > > > > > known all this information already if you had actually read a paper > > > > > > on > > > > > > the subject like you said you had. Here's an actual paper on the > > > > > > subject that you can now read:http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/biology.html > > > > > > I read the above post. > > > > > Prove to me that you understood it. > > > > > Martin > > > > I visited this site:http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/biology.html > > > > I read the interesting long report. I learned some things about > > > abiogenesis that I did not know. > > > What five amino acids did the Ceylon-born biochemist Cyril > > Ponnamperuma find in a meteorite that had fallen in Australia on > > September 28, 1969? > > > Working with Ruth Mariner and Carl Sagan and using an experimental > > procedure similar to the Miller/Urey experiment, what chemical did > > Ponnamperuma synthesize and how do living cells use it? > > > What is the distinction between "chemical evolution" and "biological > > evolution"? > > > Plantlife had to have evolved before animal life. Why? > > > What is the theory of mechanism? > > > What is the Gaia hypothesis and what ethical message does it send? > > > What is the naturalistic fallacy and how does a moral code based on > > the Gaia hypothesis avoid it? > > > How does Elliott Sober explain why people sometimes behave unethically > > even though natural selection would demand that they do. > > > You forget, Jason, I am a university professor and I can tell when > > somebody hasn't studied but only says that they did. > I did not download the article but I read it. If I wanted to download the > article, I could easily answer the questions. I am not in college anymore > and do not have to take any more tests or exams. I did not even like > taking tests and exams when I was in college. I did. It is, after all, part of the learning process. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On May 30, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > I did not download the article but I read it. Wait. How can you read the article without downloading it to your computer? Do you mean you didn't "print it out"? I didn't either. It isn't necessary. If you had actually read the article you would have been able to answer questions about what you had read. You obviously didn't read the article even though you said you did. Martin Quote
Guest Christopher Morris Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2905072336340001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1180501773.837383.112070@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On May 30, 12:08 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > 29 May 2007 >> > Do Creationists Publish in >> > Notable Refereed Journals? >> > David Buckna >> > =A9 David Buckna. All Rights Reserved. >> > >> > Creation =B3Scientists=B2? >> > Many critics perpetuate false claims to the effect that no >> > genuine >> > scientist would be a creationist. The Institute for Creation Research >> > refutes this myth here, as does Answers in Genesis here. >> > In his book The Monkey Business (1982) paleontologist Niles >> > Eldredge wrote that no author who published in the Creation Research >> > Society Quarterly =B3has contributed a single article to any reputable >> > scientific journal=B2 (p.83). Apparently Eldredge couldn=B9t be >> > bothered= >> to >> > glance at the Science Citation Index or any other major science >> > bibliographic source. >> >> > Developmental biologist Willem J. Ouweneel, a Dutch creationist >> > and CRSQ contributor, published a classic and widely cited paper on >> > developmental anomalies in fruit flies (=B3Developmental genetics of >> > homoeosis,=B2 Advances in Genetics, 16 [1976], 179-248). Herpetologist >> > Wayne Frair, a frequent CRSQ contributor, publishes his work on turtle >> > systematics and serology in such journals as Journal of Herpetology, >> > Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Science, and Herpetologica. >> >> <snip> >> >> So if they are getting papers published then what are they complaining >> about? The fact is that they get papers published when they do >> science and they don't get papers published when they try to spread >> religious dogma. You've just proven our point, Jason. Way to go! >> >> Martin > > Martin, > Did you read the entire article? I read it and the author, David Buckna, > done an excellent job. He mentioning the bias that advocates of creation > science have had to deal with in getting their articles published in > journals. In some cases, they even had to alter their articles to get them > published. One of the editors even mentioned that they did not print > letters from the advocates of creation science. I was pleased to learn > that some of the advocates of creation science have been able to get their > articles published. Do you admit that some of the advocates of creation > science know just as much about science as the advocates of evolution? > Jason, Like in all things, if you do not do the homework you do not get the gold star. In this case, they had to do some actual research in the field of study and that was the basis of their paper, their homework, which was then published in the Journals, they got the gold stars. This is not a matter of bias but a matter of people wanting to be lazy, get something for nothing, and claim it is bias. When you do not do anything that is worthy of publishing of course it will not be published first you have to do the hard part the homework. When the creationists start to do their homework then we will start to consider listening to what they have to say until then do not whine that no one is interested in your complaints. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 01:37, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 29 May 2007 14:10:22 -0700, gudloos wrote: > > On 29 Maj, 22:15, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> In article <8d9ui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > >> <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > [snips] > > >> > On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:55:01 -0700, Jason wrote: > > >> > > How do evolutionists believe that the first living cell came to be? > > >> > Evolutionists are the wrong people to ask; the correct people to ask are > >> > abiogenesists. You know, completely different field of study and all > >> > that. > > >> Various people have told me that Evolution and Abiogenesis are separate fields. > > > Don't you believe them? Jason you are hilarious. > > Isn't it funny how he's so quick to believe anyone who says anything > "anti-evolution", even when it has nothing whatsoever to do with > evolution, yet when it comes to examining actual facts and what the > science actually says, he demands "proof" of every single step when he > himself knows (or should) that's not how science works. > > Complete and absolute acceptance of whatever nonsense comes along on one > side, and complete rejection of reality on the other. Yet somehow he > seems to think this is an honest and legitimate approach. > > I tell you, religion turns the brain to tapioca. It is called being saintly. > -- > Christianity is evil by it's own standards. - Paul Feonic- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Masked Avenger Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <1180486688.526020.30680@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On May 30, 4:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> In article <1180466455.275080.314...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, bramble >>> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 28 mayo, 20:33, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:20:34 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>> <Jason-2805071220350...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>> In article > <1180351477.189532.148...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> The two books which you yourself haven't read. Is this naivite or >>>>>>> abject stupidity? I can't tell anymore and am no longer > interested in >>>>>>> giving you the benefit of the doubt. >>>>>> I have read the comments of some of those scientists in "ICR > Newsletters" >>>>>> during the past 5 years so see no need to re-read that same sort of >>>>>> information in those two books. However, the books would be great for >>>>>> people that do not subscribe to the newletter. >>>>>> Jason >>>>> The ICR does not do science. They are a religious cult. They are liars. >>>>> Deal with it. >>>> ICR means Institute of Creation Science. It is a religious >>>> institution. >>>> Bramble >>> Yes, that is true. It's a religious organization and they also operate a >>> Christian College. >> In other words, a brainwashing institute. >> >> A Christian college is the only kind of college where you pass because >> you _don't_ know any science. >> >> Martin > > And state universities brainwash people into believing in evolution. My > statement makes as much sense as your statement. Nothing you say makes any sense ....... I have been following this thread for some time now and feel compelled to comment ...... you are mind numbingly 'ignorant' ....... the term 'intellectual pygmy' comes to mind ..... Evolution doesn't require any brain washing ...... just a smattering of actual brains ..... the evidence to support it is overwhelming and powerful ....... that you are wilfully ignorant of it speaks volumes about your lack of intelligence ...... -- MA ....Yoiks .... and away ..... Only two things are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity .............. and I'm not sure about the Universe .......... - A. Einstein Does Schr Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 04:02, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180486190.340738.81...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 3:41 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <Xns993F568C27F81freddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone > > > > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote: > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >news:Jason-2805072255010001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: > > > > > > How do evolutionists believe that the first living cell came to be? > > > > > We don't know yet. > > > > The advocates of creation science know. > > > Tell me, Jason, how does anything as complex as the simple animal cell > > form from dust, let alone an entire human body? The writers of the > > Bible had no idea how complex the human body is, let alone the simple > > cell: it took billions of years for these things to evolve. > > > Martin > > Not if there is a creator involved in the process.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 04:19, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180486688.526020.30...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 4:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1180466455.275080.314...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, bramble > > > > <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 28 mayo, 20:33, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:20:34 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > <Jason-2805071220350...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > > >In article > > <1180351477.189532.148...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> The two books which you yourself haven't read. Is this naivite or > > > > > >> abject stupidity? I can't tell anymore and am no longer > interested in > > > > > >> giving you the benefit of the doubt. > > > > > > >I have read the comments of some of those scientists in "ICR > Newsletters" > > > > > >during the past 5 years so see no need to re-read that same sort of > > > > > >information in those two books. However, the books would be great for > > > > > >people that do not subscribe to the newletter. > > > > > >Jason > > > > > > The ICR does not do science. They are a religious cult. They are liars. > > > > > Deal with it. > > > > > ICR means Institute of Creation Science. It is a religious > > > > institution. > > > > Bramble > > > > Yes, that is true. It's a religious organization and they also operate a > > > Christian College. > > > In other words, a brainwashing institute. > > > A Christian college is the only kind of college where you pass because > > you _don't_ know any science. > > > Martin > > And state universities brainwash people into believing in evolution. My > statement makes as much sense as your statement.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 04:22, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180487516.728068.304...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 7:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > The reality is that the advocates of evolution and abiogenesis have NO > > > evidence of how the first living cells came to be. > > > Stop lying. I've posted this three times already. Could somebody let > > me know if this post is getting through or not? Perhaps Jason has > > killfiled me. > > > In 1953, the Miller-Uley experiment showed that amino acids could > > form > > spontaneously from elements present in the "primorial soup". (See > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment) Other > > experiments showed that bilipid membranes can form spontaneously. > > (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer) Sidney Fox's > > research showed that amino acids can spontaneously form protein > > chains. (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox) Protein > > chains can then guide the formation of RNA chains just as RNA chains > > are known to guide the formation of protein chains. (See > >http://www.hhmi.org/news/lindquist2.html). German scientists have > > already produced molecules in the laboratory that are capable of > > reproducing themselves and are therefore alive. (See > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm). > > > Primative cells would have formed as a way to prevent the contents of > > the cell from drying out. (See > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm > > > > > > > ). The simplest cells would have been prokaryote cells (See > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote) which would have been the > > ancestors of modern bacteria and archaea while more advanced > > eukaryotic cells (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryotic) would > > have been the ancestors of modern animal, plant and fungis cells. > > Eukaryotic cells could have formed through a process known as viral > > eukaryogenesis (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis > > ) in which a virus forms an endosymbiosic relationship with a host > > prokaryote cell. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory > > ) Mitochondria and plastids are also believed to have arisen as a > > result of endosymbiosis, the evidence being that mitochondria and > > plastids share characteristics with bacteria cells, the only > > difference being that they cannot survive independent of the rest of > > the cell, but that's fine because human cells cannot survive > > independent of the rest of the body either. In both cases, the parts > > have evolved to depend on the whole. > > > Most of this information has been posted already. You would have > > known all this information already if you had actually read a paper > > on > > the subject like you said you had. Here's an actual paper on the > > subject that you can now read:http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/biology.html > > > Martin > > Martin, > I read the above post. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <PM77i.4542$u56.48@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net>, > bm1@nonespam.com wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <S367i.12613$RX.5882@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, >>> bm1@nonespam.com wrote: [snip] >>> >> It looks like they were doing good science. It is worth noting that >> none of the papers published concerned "creation science." > > Good point. However, all articles written by advocates of evolution are > not related to evolution. > > Huh? What are you babbling about? Wrong! There are a whole bunch of articles related to evolution. And even if you missed out a word (and wanted to say: "Not all articles written [...] are related to evolution), it would rather prove the point. The points we were making, that is. Not yours. Tokay -- There is no substitute for good manners, except, perhaps, fast reflexes. Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <e967i.12614$RX.12354@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > bm1@nonespam.com wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <koiui4-0qe.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >>> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Martin, >>>>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. >>>> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" >>>> >>>> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as >>>> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. >>>> >>>> Any more lies to spew? >>> Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > non-life? >>> >> Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living >> things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has >> no validity. > > It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer? > > His answer was that you failed to grasp the meaning of "evolve". Tokay -- There is no substitute for good manners, except, perhaps, fast reflexes. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 06:14, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180490913.993436.208...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 10:19 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1180486688.526020.30...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin snip> > Martin, > Someone else challenged me to find proof that there was a bias against the > advocates of creation science that submit articles to journals. I googled > "rejected creation science articles". I found this article and learned > some things I did not know. I hope that you will also learn some things > that you did not know related to bias. What you learned is that you were wrong, that scientists who are known as advocates of creation science do have their work published in peer- reviewed articles; so much for your claim of bias. Furthermore none of the work published provided support for creation science, which provides you with no evidence of any actual research done in that area. Based on your above post, however, you learned absolutely nothing and continue to tell the same lies as before. You are very strange. snip Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 06:14, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180490913.993436.208...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 10:19 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1180486688.526020.30...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >snip > > Martin, > Someone else challenged me to find proof that there was a bias against the > advocates of creation science that submit articles to journals. I googled > "rejected creation science articles". It proves that you are wrong, but you are so silly or dishonest that you think it supports you. I found this article and learned > some things I did not know. I hope that you will also learn some things > that you did not know related to bias. You learned nothing. snip Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 05:39, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Tue, 29 May 2007 21:14:04 -0700, in alt.atheism > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2905072114040...@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > > >In article <1180490913.993436.208...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> On May 30, 10:19 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <1180486688.526020.30...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > On May 30, 4:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > > > In article <1180466455.275080.314...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > >bramble > > >> > > > <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > On 28 mayo, 20:33, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > > > > On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:20:34 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > > > > <Jason-2805071220350...@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> > > > > > >In article > > >> > <1180351477.189532.148...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > >> > > > > > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> The two books which you yourself haven't read. Is this > >naivite or > >> > > > > > >> abject stupidity? I can't tell anymore and am no longer > >> > interested in > >> > > > > > >> giving you the benefit of the doubt. > > >> > > > > > >I have read the comments of some of those scientists in "ICR > >> > Newsletters" > >> > > > > > >during the past 5 years so see no need to re-read that same sort of > >> > > > > > >information in those two books. However, the books would be > >great for > >> > > > > > >people that do not subscribe to the newletter. > >> > > > > > >Jason > > >> > > > > > The ICR does not do science. They are a religious cult. They > >are liars. > >> > > > > > Deal with it. > > >> > > > > ICR means Institute of Creation Science. It is a religious > >> > > > > institution. > >> > > > > Bramble > > >> > > > Yes, that is true. It's a religious organization and they also operate a > >> > > > Christian College. > > >> > > In other words, a brainwashing institute. > > >> > > A Christian college is the only kind of college where you pass because > >> > > you _don't_ know any science. > > >> > And state universities brainwash people into believing in evolution. > > >> False! State universities back up their claims with EVIDENCE. > > >> > My > >> > statement makes as much sense as your statement. > > >> Except that it is a lie. > > >> Martin > > >Martin, > >Someone else challenged me to find proof that there was a bias against the > >advocates of creation science that submit articles to journals. I googled > >"rejected creation science articles". I found this article and learned > >some things I did not know. I hope that you will also learn some things > >that you did not know related to bias. > > >29 May 2007 > >Do Creationists Publish in > >Notable Refereed Journals? > >David Buckna > > Delete long article that Jason hasn't gotten permission for. > > > Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 06:56, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > >>> Martin, > > >>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. > > >> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" > > > >> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as > > >> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. > > > >> Any more lies to spew? > > > > Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > non-life? > > > Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living > > things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has > > no validity. > > It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 06:56, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > >>> Martin, > > >>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. > > >> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" > > > >> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as > > >> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. > > > >> Any more lies to spew? > > > > Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > non-life? > > > Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living > > things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has > > no validity. > > It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 10:19, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 30, 12:56 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > > >>> Martin, > > > >>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. > > > >> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" > > > > >> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as > > > >> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. > > > > >> Any more lies to spew? > > > > > Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > > non-life? > > > > Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living > > > things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has > > > no validity. > > > It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer? > > It's a meaningless question because you will just ignore any answer he > writes. I resent being asked to answer a question, spending hours > writing my answer and then getting ignored until finally after I've > posted my response five times you reply with "I read it" but don't > respond to anything I said. What's the point of bothering with you? Beyond the entertainment value there is no point. He is not capable of discussing anythintg like an honest adult. > > Martin- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 30 Maj, 06:56, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> b...@nonespam.com wrote: >>> Jason wrote: >>>> In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >>>> <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: >>>>>> Martin, >>>>>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. >>>>> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" >>>>> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as >>>>> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. >>>>> Any more lies to spew? >>>> Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from >> non-life? >> >>> Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living >>> things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has >>> no validity. >> It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message snip > The reality is that the advocates of evolution and abiogenesis have NO > evidence of how the first living cells came to be. It's true that > Christians also have no evidence which proves that God created life. Until > I see the evidence that living cells can evolve from non-life, I will not > change my opinions on this subject. Hey, whatever blows your dress up - I couldn't care less. I, for one, will not believe in your god until there's objective, verifiable evidence that he/she/it exists. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in snip > > How does it feel to be part of a group of people that have a callous > disregard for the lives of viable unwanted unborn babies? How does it feel to be a liar? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Jim07D7 Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> said: >On May 28, 4:54 am, Jim07D7 <Jim0...@nospam.net> wrote: >> "James Brock" <j...@bellsouth.net> said: <...> >> Even agreeing on a "secular" definition of "faith" will not do, >> because Jason and other people of his ilk will equivocate for their >> god as readily as they will lie for it. >> >> Instead, all of you people who are paying so much attention to Jason >> should simply kill file him, as I have long since done. He is not >> about to change his mind. > >It is morally wrong to give up hope oon the mentally ill. > What I see happening in response to Jason does not appear to be of therapeutic value. If anything, it seems to reinforce his delusions. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 On 30 Maj, 14:55, Tokay Pino Gris <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 30 Maj, 06:56, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> In article <e967i.12614$RX.12...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > >> b...@nonespam.com wrote: > >>> Jason wrote: > >>>> In article <koiui4-0qe....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > >>>> <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, 28 May 2007 00:08:03 -0700, Jason wrote: > >>>>>> Martin, > >>>>>> The person that wrote this article truly understands how atheists think. > >>>>> "Each and every atheist believes that something came from nothing" > >>>>> Since I'm an atheist and do not believe that, then your statement is, as > >>>>> is easily predictable based on the fact _you_ made it, a lie. > >>>>> Any more lies to spew? > >>>> Do you believe that it is possible for a living cell to evolve from > >> non-life? > > >>> Meaningless question. Non-living things do not evolve, only living > >>> things do. So, as has been pointed out to you before, the question has > >>> no validity. > >> It's possible to answer a meaningless question so what is your answer?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Jason Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 In article <1180514437.317608.17790@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 30, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > I did not download the article but I read it. > > Wait. How can you read the article without downloading it to your > computer? Do you mean you didn't "print it out"? I didn't either. > It isn't necessary. If you had actually read the article you would > have been able to answer questions about what you had read. You > obviously didn't read the article even though you said you did. > > Martin I meant that I did not save the article or print out the article. I am a speed reader. I speed read the article. My memory is not as good as it was when I was your age. As the song says, "what a drag it is getting old." I have a question for you. While I was in high school, we looked at one-celled creatures under microscopes. They were called parameciums and amoebae. Do you honestly believe that mankind evolved from a one celled-life form? You could never convince me that it could ever happen. If it did happen, it appears to me that it would be easy to find two or three celled parameciums and amoebae. I guess you would write that other one celled life forms evolved into higher life forms but that one celled life forms like parameciums and amoebae (for whatever reason) have never evolved in the past several million years. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted May 30, 2007 Posted May 30, 2007 In article <1180513796.400583.100660@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 30, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1180501328.258832.5...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On May 30, 11:33 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <1180490981.530250.223...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 30, 10:22 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > In article > > > > <1180487516.728068.304...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 30, 7:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The reality is that the advocates of evolution and abiogenesis > > have NO > > > > > > > > evidence of how the first living cells came to be. > > > > > > > > > Stop lying. I've posted this three times already. Could somebody let > > > > > > > me know if this post is getting through or not? Perhaps Jason has > > > > > > > killfiled me. > > > > > > > > > In 1953, the Miller-Uley experiment showed that amino acids could > > > > > > > form > > > > > > > spontaneously from elements present in the "primorial soup". (See > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment) Other > > > > > > > experiments showed that bilipid membranes can form spontaneously. > > > > > > > (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer) Sidney Fox's > > > > > > > research showed that amino acids can spontaneously form protein > > > > > > > chains. (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox) Protein > > > > > > > chains can then guide the formation of RNA chains just as RNA chains > > > > > > > are known to guide the formation of protein chains. (See > > > > > > >http://www.hhmi.org/news/lindquist2.html). German scientists have > > > > > > > already produced molecules in the laboratory that are capable of > > > > > > > reproducing themselves and are therefore alive. (See > > > > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm). > > > > > > > > > Primative cells would have formed as a way to prevent the contents of > > > > > > > the cell from drying out. (See > > > > > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm > > > > > > > > > ). The simplest cells would have been prokaryote cells (See > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote) which would have been the > > > > > > > ancestors of modern bacteria and archaea while more advanced > > > > > > > eukaryotic cells (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryotic) would > > > > > > > have been the ancestors of modern animal, plant and fungis cells. > > > > > > > Eukaryotic cells could have formed through a process known as viral > > > > > > > eukaryogenesis (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis > > > > > > > ) in which a virus forms an endosymbiosic relationship with a host > > > > > > > prokaryote cell. (See > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) Mitochondria and plastids are also believed to have arisen as a > > > > > > > result of endosymbiosis, the evidence being that mitochondria and > > > > > > > plastids share characteristics with bacteria cells, the only > > > > > > > difference being that they cannot survive independent of the rest of > > > > > > > the cell, but that's fine because human cells cannot survive > > > > > > > independent of the rest of the body either. In both cases, the parts > > > > > > > have evolved to depend on the whole. > > > > > > > > > Most of this information has been posted already. You would have > > > > > > > known all this information already if you had actually read a paper > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > the subject like you said you had. Here's an actual paper on the > > > > > > > subject that you can now read:http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/biology.html > > > > > > > > I read the above post. > > > > > > > Prove to me that you understood it. > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > I visited this site:http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/biology.html > > > > > > I read the interesting long report. I learned some things about > > > > abiogenesis that I did not know. > > > > > What five amino acids did the Ceylon-born biochemist Cyril > > > Ponnamperuma find in a meteorite that had fallen in Australia on > > > September 28, 1969? > > > > > Working with Ruth Mariner and Carl Sagan and using an experimental > > > procedure similar to the Miller/Urey experiment, what chemical did > > > Ponnamperuma synthesize and how do living cells use it? > > > > > What is the distinction between "chemical evolution" and "biological > > > evolution"? > > > > > Plantlife had to have evolved before animal life. Why? > > > > > What is the theory of mechanism? > > > > > What is the Gaia hypothesis and what ethical message does it send? > > > > > What is the naturalistic fallacy and how does a moral code based on > > > the Gaia hypothesis avoid it? > > > > > How does Elliott Sober explain why people sometimes behave unethically > > > even though natural selection would demand that they do. > > > > > You forget, Jason, I am a university professor and I can tell when > > > somebody hasn't studied but only says that they did. > > > I did not download the article but I read it. If I wanted to download the > > article, I could easily answer the questions. I am not in college anymore > > and do not have to take any more tests or exams. I did not even like > > taking tests and exams when I was in college. > > I did. It is, after all, part of the learning process. > > Martin Yes, it is. However, some people are better at it than others. Some people really enjoy it. I'm glad that you like it. Jason 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.