cofty

Joined

• started 464 topics
• posted 24,957 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by cofty

• 
  154

  I believe in Evolution and that God created life

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  hydrothemal vents are very inhospitable places, perhaps some of the most inhospitable places on earth - Vidqun

  Actually they are teeming with life. But I'm not talking about black smokers with their extremes of temperature where thermophilic archaea and giant worms live. I'm talking about alkaline vents where the temperature is perfect for life.

  A hydrothermal vent with all its chemical components (devoid of living organisms) could then be replicated in a laboratory environment.

  Actually that is really difficult. The bottom of the ocean is a strange world with extreme pressures. The labyrinth of micro pores inside an alkaline vent with cells just fractions of a micron across is not easy to replicate. Remember too that the early oceans had no oxygen. But there are a number of labs working on it right now and the results are very promising. I will describe some of the chemical reactions that have been achieved in another thread.

  I guarantee a similar result as with the "primordial soup" experiments. After manipulating their soupy concoction in all kinds of ways, they would send lightning bolts through it. However, it remained dead.

  I totally agree. Organic soup is a non-starter. It is a thermodynamic dead-end. The early experiments failed to explain where the energy flux was coming from. Alkaline vents explains this perfectly and in fastidious detail. No lightning bolts required - no lightning bolts available at the bottom of the ocean!

  still a long way from living cells

  Yes there is a very long journey to the first cell but every step is being investigated. Nick Lane lays out the whole pathway in his latest book and shows how it could arise from nothing but carbon, hydrogen and rock in a hydrothermal vent.

  I cannot go along with such a theory,

  Fortunately the scientific community don't waste too much time worrying whether or not Vidqun will buy it. They are doing the hard work in labs all around the world. When it happens all you will want to talk about is cosmology.
• 
  47

  Looking for evolutionary info on how smells can be carried on DNA

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as i said last night the smell of pus from an infection is recognized by all puppies without their being exposed to the smell previously, this is shown because all puppies react the same way to this smell, which is to lick the infected pus laden wound.. this demonstrates that smells are carried on dna in some way.

  any thoughts on how?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  I've asked a 100 times for Cofty Viviane and other to explain the biochemical charge - Hadriel

  It is still a nonsensical question. There is no such thing as "THE biochemical charge". It is just gibberish.

  I offered to discuss any aspect of origin of life that you want to ask about. I asked you to first take a couple of minutes to set out what you think scientists understand so far about abiogenesis.

  You refused to do so. Why?

  Crabs - This question about smell has been answered. Get your fingers out your ears.

  The answer is epigenetics.

  There are no genes for smells. There are no "new smells".

  Odours are mixtures of molecules.

  We have 800 active genes for olfactory receptors that fire in response to odours. Combinations of receptors fire simultaneously combining their signals to the brain and enabling us to detect far far more than 800 smells. In a similar way our three colour receptors fire simultaneously to allow us to see thousands of colours.

  Every receptor is coded for by genes. The parts of our brains that decode the signals are coded by genes. The chemical signals that trigger memories, sexual attraction, repulsion, hunger, fear or nausea in response to specific smells are coded for by combinations of genes. Every one of those genes can be turned on or off by methylation.

  What are you trying to prove by making the blindingly obvious point that not all of the specific details have been unravelled ?
• 
  84

  Why are the atheists on this site so hateful?

  by HopeEverLasting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  all us creationists try to do is offer true evidence that the one and only god is out there watching and looking down on us.

  we present that certain scientists know the truth about god and that he is everything that we see from trees, life, weather, the air we breath, and even the most simple molecules.

  but of course you atheists reject it because it is your nature to not be humble and see god because you want to rule your own life.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  I could not begin to list the catalogue of hateful vitriolic attacks I have received from Jesus buddies for simply presenting evidence that challenges their superstitions.

  I would love it if even one christian could present some evidence to support their beliefs. I could do a better job of christian apologetics than any christian on this forum.
• 
  14

  Why disbelieving in God is foolish

  by HopeEverLasting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  look, now before i speak, i want to say that it is very okay for someone to not believe.

  are they hurting anyone?

  killing anyone?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  there is a problem when you continually hate on someone for what they believe

  Nobody hates you for being superstitious. Stop being so paranoid.
  
  
• 
  154

  I believe in Evolution and that God created life

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  You are confusing your vents. Alkaline vents are not like black smokers. I will explain why you are wrong later

  Of course you could get the book if you were not so afraid of evidence.
• 
  154

  I believe in Evolution and that God created life

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Vidqun - DNA is not information in the same sense of the word that this sentence is information.

  There is no sender or receiver. It is just a complex dance of electrons.

  How do you think DNA developed?

  Briefly - nucleotides formed in hydrothermal vents.

  The acetyl CoA pathway (to be exact a prebiotic equivalent) generated small reactive organic molecules from CO2 and H2 via a few short steps that generated enough energy to drive the formation of nucleotides and their polymerisation into long chains.

  These steps were catalysed by inorganic minerals that transferred electrons on to CO2 to form reactive acetyl groups. If you would like to understand the details and read about the work being done in labs to investigate this process get a copy of "The Vital Question" by Nick Lane.

  
  
• 
  148

  There is science that prove God exists

  by HopeEverLasting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses think that just the bible is proof that god exists but they are wrong.

  there is another mode for how he exists.

  now we all know many scientists who are creationists now weren’t creationists until they examined the evidence for themselves.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Why do people think it is virtue to loudly express opinions about a difficult topic, that by their own admission they have never investigated?

  Wilful ignorance is a choice.
• 
  148

  There is science that prove God exists

  by HopeEverLasting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses think that just the bible is proof that god exists but they are wrong.

  there is another mode for how he exists.

  now we all know many scientists who are creationists now weren’t creationists until they examined the evidence for themselves.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Now we all know many scientists who are creationists now weren’t creationists until they examined the evidence for themselves.

  No I don't know any that aren't motivated by religious superstitions.

  They studied the nature of DNA, human cells, trees, fossils, and even thunderstorms.

  All of which require no supernatural explanations.

  we could and I do mean we could say science proves God exists

  You could but you would be lying to yourself.

  All atheistic evolutionists cannot seem to explain how other planets were formed.

  We know exactly how planets form. Cosmology has nothing to do with evolution.

  I'd like to know what the general people here think

  Evolution is a fact beyond all reasonable doubt.

  Check the end of this OP for links to 38 separate lines of evidence... (so far)

  Serious question - what books that present the scientific evidence for evolution have you studied?

  I predict the answer is none and that you will avoid the question.
• 
  154

  I believe in Evolution and that God created life

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  What does that mean in English?
• 
  47

  Looking for evolutionary info on how smells can be carried on DNA

  by Crabby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as i said last night the smell of pus from an infection is recognized by all puppies without their being exposed to the smell previously, this is shown because all puppies react the same way to this smell, which is to lick the infected pus laden wound.. this demonstrates that smells are carried on dna in some way.

  any thoughts on how?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  the smell is new, thus could not exist on an existing gene

  Maybe if you read the answers people provide for you rather than rushing to type out yet another insult.

  There are no genes for smells.

  We have 800 active genes for olfactory receptors that fire in response to odours. Combinations of receptors fire simultaneously combining their signals to the brain and enabling us to detect far far more than 800 smells. In a similar way our three colour receptors fire simultaneously to allow us to see thousands of colours.

  Every receptor is coded for by genes. The parts of our brains that decode the signals are coded by genes. The chemical signals that trigger love, repulsion, hunger, fear or nausea in response to specific smells are coded for by combinations of genes. Every one of those genes can be turned on or off by methylation.

  What are you trying to prove by making the blindingly obvious point that not all of the specific details have been unravelled yet?