Has this been posted yet?
It should have been.
Flat_Accent
JoinedPosts by Flat_Accent
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
Oh my fucking god will you please listen.
If I don't make a claim, I don't need to provide you with evidence.
The correct answer to your question is 'we don't know', that's the honest truth, and it's neither a claim nor belief. Life could have arisen any which way possible.
However, if I claim that a Magic Toaster created life, then who needs to provide evidence? It is the person that makes the claim. You are in that position, and so you hold that responsibility.
This is a pointless thread and you have sucked me into it with your blatant buffoonery.
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
You might as well go back to the KH.
COFTY'S LAW
COFTY'S LAW
COFTY'S LAW
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
I don't need to supply evidence, I'm not making the claim. That's the point.
You make the claim God did it, I call BS and wait for science to figure out a proper answer.
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
Really.
You consider that an attack?
Go outside dude, the cashier at Best Buy will be more fiesty than I am.
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
We keep telling you we don't know and you keep ignoring it.
What are you trying to prove?
DNA doesn't mean God created life. Scientists do not say DNA was the original life form on earth, for one. And when someone builds a house, they are merely changing the constitution of matter and rearranging the pieces of pre-existing materials to make something that we consider useful. The similarity is nonexistent. The creationist stance is not that god recombobulated matter to form living things, but that he spontaneously generated life from nothing.
This argument is not a non-sequitur. If you can't find a valid reason to say life came from . . . 'nothing', it doesn't mean you jump onto the God bandwagon. It's also not wise to say because something is yet unknown that God did it. It's an argument from ignorance, and it's failed consistently for the last 5000+ years. Why would it start working now?
-
170
Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!
by Silent_Scream inscientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
-
-
Flat_Accent
We don't know how life got here.
What we do know, in detail, is the process by which simple life became complex life through random mutation and natural selection. So to me, the idea of simple life being formed under the right conditions is not hard to envision.
You however, posit an magic man in the sky that popped life into existence.
I claim nothing, instead I tacitly admit I don't know.
You claim God, yet you supply no evidence of this, so therefore I reject your claim and have no reason to change from my initial position - Agnostic Atheism.
If anything this thread should be the other way round.
-
-
-
Flat_Accent
Sure. Howabout we 'discuss' it in the back of my chevy tonight at make-out point ;D
-
2
Inconsistent logic over dinner.
by Flat_Accent in> "you can never rely on politicians, because they will never agree on anything.".
> "we really need a new sound system, but the sharing congregations won't agree to it .
> "like the bible says, 'things going from bad to worse.'".
-
-
Flat_Accent
> "You can never rely on politicians, because they will never agree on anything."
> "We really need a new sound system, but the sharing congregations won't agree to it . . ."
> "Like the Bible says, 'things going from bad to worse.'"
> "Nothing's changed."
> "There's an undenyable balance in nature."
> "This damn Japanese Knotweed has taken over the Kingdom Hall car park!!"
Great evening.
-
41
Quake reveals day of Jesus' crucifixion
by Vidqun inhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47555983/ns/technology_and_science-science/.
"when data about the jewish calendar and astronomical calculations are factored in, a handful of possible dates result, with friday, april 3, 33, being the best match, according to the researchers.
".
-
-
Flat_Accent
This is a backwards way of doing the research.
There's no evidence an earthquake actually happened on Friday April 3rd. They just use the Bible's 'testimony', figured out the date and then said 'an earthquake must have happened this day.' If you're going to do that at least investigate the reliability of the source. ie. 0.