KateWild

Joined

• started 154 topics
• posted 6,385 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by KateWild

• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  How does Powner's research prove or disprove God? Even if he finds the origin of life, he would only be telling believers how God did it? Not that God did not Create life. Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  This process provides a mechanism by which a small initial imbalance in chirality can become overwhelming.-cofty

  I understand why you believe as you do cofty, but it's my perspective that we simply know how God did it. By understanding this chemistry it helps conclude to a greater degree the existence of a Creator. The point that he is indifferent to human suffering is something that I have come to terms with.

  Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  The problem is in getting believers to define their god.-cofty

  Whilst I agree that everyone defines Gods in a unique way, good point, I fail to see why it is a problem. If we are not harming anyone or pushing our beliefs on others why is defining the God we believe in really matter?

  You are right in that particular Gods can be disproven. By reading the bible properly, and praying fervently, I came to the conclusion the God of the bible and the God that is the hearer and answerer of prayers does not exist.

  By studying chemistry I have come to the conclusion a Creator does exist.

  Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  do your homework first. I have done mine and will quote impeccable sources if you really are too lazy to do your own research-phizzy

  Well goodmorning to you too Phizzy.

  That's bait if ever there was some. I have read a lot of scientific material. If you're going to quote the famous fundie micro-biologist Dawkins, then do so. I have already explained why I don't find him credible. Besides I am not sure that he actually uses science to prove God doesn't exist anyway. But if not give me some quotes that science proves God does not exist.

  What is proof and evidence to one person, it not to another.

  Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Why probably and why evidence? Connect the dots from premise to conclusion...-Viv

  I am not entirely sure I understand exactly what you mean? Is it possible that my conclusions are evidence for me alone, instead of proof for others?

  Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  I must be one of those with a strong predisposition to believe in a Creator.-snowbird

  I am not sure of this theory, but believers are found in all walks of life. No matter how much they investigate the still hold to their beliefs. Einstien is a good example. Although he did not believe in the God of the bible he adamantly said he was not an Atheist. So he did reach some conclusions that were not exactly in line with all of Judaism. He also went to a Catholic school and did not agree with those teachings. He still clung to the fact he was a religious man.

  Einstiens beliefs are somewhat ambiguous though, I have read a lot about him and come to the conclusion he is telling us to mind our own business.

  Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Its bucket chemistry as Saoi demonstrated.-cofty

  Specifically how did he demonstrate this? The term "bucket chemistry" is not used in peer reviewed papers mister. But I will play. Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  You might as well say that rainbows prove god.- cofty

  hahaha I was offline and didn't take the bait. Light refraction is very interesting but it's physics not chemistry, and I know less about that. But what I do know I find remarkable and leads me to conclude that likely there is a creator. Kate xx

  
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  I can't find any of Powner's work. That's why I am a little doubting of his credibility. If anyone can produce a link it would be great. Kate xx
• 
  113

  Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

  by KateWild in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

  however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

  i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  http://www.chemistry.illinois.edu/research/organic/seminar_extracts/2003_2004/Todd.pdf

  http://www.f.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~kanai/seminar/pdf/Lit_K_Sato_B4.pdf

  I don't see it as particularly strong evidence of god-OneEyedJoe

  This is the point I think of this thread, that some will view it as strong evidence and others will not. Personally I think we either born religiously inclined or not, but many are reliogious and then become non-believers, and some that were not brought up religious developed a religious inclination.

  I hope you like the links

  Kate xx