Poll

¿What happen if you put water, stones, and air in an environment free or microorganisms?

It will evolution in life.
0 (0%)
It boils and becomes in life.
0 (0%)
It explode and create life.
0 (0%)
0 x 0 = 0 (Noting happen).
2 (25%)
Noting because it need more ingredients to become in life.
6 (75%)

Total Members Voted: 8

Voting closed: October 27, 2008, 11:39:23 AM

Author Topic: If you put a water and stones in the correct atmosphere it evolution in life...  (Read 2121 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RockStar

¿What happen if you put water, stones, and air in an environment free or microorganisms?

I’m atheist and I think that it will evolution in life, is obious, the stones and the water evolutione in life... the probe is that it is what happened in the earth.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
what is the "correct atmosphere"?  You are missing one critical ingredient, a source of energy. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Goodkat

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1193
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • A man's delusion is insanity, a nation's, religion
Rockstar is attempting to parody what he thinks atheism is.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
hahahaha

Offline Goodkat

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1193
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • A man's delusion is insanity, a nation's, religion
I have something funnier and almost as stupid
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3qFdbUEq5s[/youtube]

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
I have something funnier and almost as stupid
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3qFdbUEq5s[/youtube]

I don't know, that's pretty stupid too.
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Goodkat

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1193
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • A man's delusion is insanity, a nation's, religion
I don't know, that's pretty stupid too.
Just not quite as stupid as this troll.

Offline WellManicuredMan

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Oh, for a second there I thought you were Afadly.

Offline Cycle4Fun

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1371
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
I have something funnier and almost as stupid
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3qFdbUEq5s[/youtube]

Wow!  That woman is ignorant and was oblivious for years!  At least abiogenesis is a very new scientific field of study and is not well understood.

What happens when it rains?  Water falls to the ground.
What happens after it rains?  The sun comes out.
What happens when you use a sprinkler?  You shoot water into the air.
Is the Sun shining when you use a sprinkler?  Yes.
Why do we get rainbows?  Because the government puts stuff in our water!  ::)
How do you define soul?
"A baseless assertion by simple-minded, superstitious individuals"
   -Starstuff

Offline Irish

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Darwins +18/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Moraxella catarrhalis on BA
Rainbows are not natural?  :o
20 years ago rainbows did not exist?  :o

... (Irish slaps his forward with open palm)
La scienze non ha nemici ma gli ignoranti.

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
Nice double post

We know what happens.  We've done it.  We know the outcome.  It is reproduceable, testable, provable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Uray_experiment

Offline xphobe

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5364
  • Darwins +12/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • the truth is out there
They just took another look at the dried brown crap left over in the vials from the Miller-Urey experiment using new more sensitive lab techniques, and found a whole bunch more amino acids than were found originally.

I think that's pretty cool.
I stopped believing for a little while this morning. Journey is gonna be so pissed when they find out...

Offline bahramthered

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3140
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Awsome. Didn't know this.

Offline RockStar

That’s an experiment of the 50´s in the 50´s the scientist didn’t knew about DNA or RNA,
The result of it is sugar (just the components of DNA or RNA but not ordered in a chain)

DNA can’t exist without protein and proteins can’t exist without DNA then the conclusion of the scientist was that the first cell organisms only had RNA…
RNA is a code too… in resume this code tells to the cell: Feed then absorb, then consume, then reject and feed again, and in theory this pre-RNA had the orders to: preserve some kind of form, and get reproduction to preserve the spice too.

If you’re trying to tell me that nothing can become a ordered chain of a code of conduct (RNA) without any kind of intelligence making it, then probably we can make DVD’s in a Blender.

I’m agree with you, it need more ingredients, it need the hand of God... but If you think that accidents can make codes, Please read about any kind of Engineering, or Physics and if you still belive it then you have more faith than me...  ;D

Look at this article abiogenesis is an inexplicable process (not an accident), look in your life too, see the hand of God ordering everything, God is like abiogenesis just is not well understood too.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html
« Last Edit: October 18, 2008, 10:55:33 AM by RockStar »

Offline Asmoday

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Darwins +14/-0
  • Gender: Male
And here we are again. The same old arguement of "A tornado can´t assemble a Jet on a scrap yard, so XYZ can´t come into existance without the help of the Flying Spaghetty Monster!".

I always wonder, why theists try so hard to stop everybody from thinking of abiogenesis? I mean, if what you believe is true and god really did it, then scientists will eventually reach a point, where there is no other choice than to say "They were right. God must have done it.".
When theist come here, they often say something along the lines of "Have faith in god and all will work out!". How come, that it´s these theists, who show the biggest lack of faith in their god, when their god is confronted with modern day science.

If you really believe, that god did it, then there should be nothing to worry about, right?  ;)
Absilio Mundus!

I can do no wrong. For I do not know what it is.

Offline Freak

I mean, if what you believe is true and god really did it, then scientists will eventually reach a point, where there is no other choice than to say "They were right. God must have done it.".

Good point Asmoday. Obviously they know deep down that the world looks awful suspiciously like a world where their god doesn't exist, and that scares the shit out of them.
When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bike. Then I realised, the Lord doesn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
If you’re trying to tell me that nothing can become a ordered chain of a code of conduct (RNA) without any kind of intelligence making it, then probably we can make DVD’s in a Blender.

I’m agree with you, it need more ingredients, it need the hand of God... but If you think that accidents can make codes, Please read about any kind of Engineering, or Physics and if you still belive it then you have more faith than me...  ;D

Look at this article abiogenesis is an inexplicable process (not an accident), look in your life too, see the hand of God ordering everything, God is like abiogenesis just is not well understood too.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html


Statistical Thermodynamics and chemistry is what you do not take into account.  It's not about probabilities or inprobable order, it is about carbon bonding.  The basis of your misconception is that RNA or DNA must have been ordered by something - you're right, they are - but the answer is not God - the answer is chemistry.  The religious answer WAS god before we understood chemistry.

The article you linked to is all about mathematics and probabilities.  That has no place in explaining the extraction and bonding of carbon from methane to anything else.  Chemical bonds are created and broken based on the environment.

Not everything with order has a supernatural maker.  Rocks, crystals, life - are a biproduct of chemical reactions....not a probability calculator.  Rocks dont have a rock maker, we know how they are formed.  Crystals dont have a crystal make, we know how they are formed.  Life does not have a supernatural life maker - we have a pretty good idea of how it was formed.

If we leave the answer for anything at "God did it", then we will never wonder or discover anything ever again...for we already would know the answer.  "God did it" was good when there was no way to explain why it was dark at night or why a storm came, but once we knew the real answers, it became insufficient.  If you let "God did it" become your answer to every complicated unknown, then you lose your intrinsic inquisitive mind.  If we all did it, it would remain just like the dark ages were, forever.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3nvH6gfrTc&feature=PlayList&p=AC3481305829426D&index=7[/youtube]

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
That’s an experiment of the 50´s in the 50´s the scientist didn’t knew about DNA or RNA,
The result of it is sugar (just the components of DNA or RNA but not ordered in a chain)

In 2008, a group of scientists examined vials left over from Miller's experiments of the early 1950s. Vials associated with the original, published experiment contained far more organic molecules than Stanley Miller realized; the 11 vials scientists recovered from the unpublished aspirator experiment produced 22 amino acids and the same five amines at yields comparable to the original experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey#Recent_related_studies

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
This more formally addresses your questions about abiogenesis

I seriously doubt you will watch or understand though, because in my experience, only those that want to learn watch.  You think you already know the answer, thus you do not have a need to learn.

7:28 explains it in a nutshell

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg[/youtube]
« Last Edit: October 18, 2008, 03:43:23 PM by PingTheServer »

Offline Cycle4Fun

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1371
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
^

Awesome find Ping.  Adding that to my favorite videos.
How do you define soul?
"A baseless assertion by simple-minded, superstitious individuals"
   -Starstuff

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
^

Awesome find Ping.  Adding that to my favorite videos.

This one is a little better and easier to follow, since it is shorter and has a voice.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mrBJ2WVZ8s[/youtube]

Offline Freak

I'm watching that video, and about half way through I'm thinking to myself:
"Why do people bother arguing with this stuff?"
It's so awesome hearing the complex pattern of events that occurred to give rise to something like life. I love it. It's SO much better than the silly answer of 'goddidit'.
When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bike. Then I realised, the Lord doesn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

Offline PingTheServer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 952
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Devil's Advocate
I'm watching that video, and about half way through I'm thinking to myself:
"Why do people bother arguing with this stuff?"
It's so awesome hearing the complex pattern of events that occurred to give rise to something like life. I love it. It's SO much better than the silly answer of 'goddidit'.

If you believe in a god, this is what he made.  Learning how he made it should be fun and interesting - like reaching into god's toolbox.  There was a video that eloquently described that.

Offline Freak

I'm watching that video, and about half way through I'm thinking to myself:
"Why do people bother arguing with this stuff?"
It's so awesome hearing the complex pattern of events that occurred to give rise to something like life. I love it. It's SO much better than the silly answer of 'goddidit'.

If you believe in a god, this is what he made.  Learning how he made it should be fun and interesting - like reaching into god's toolbox.  There was a video that eloquently described that.

How far back does the need to invoke God have to be pushed before people let him go?
When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bike. Then I realised, the Lord doesn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

Offline bahramthered

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3140
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Some never will. I know someone who can argue (for them) those videos very very well and yet he insists god did this.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
I'm watching that video, and about half way through I'm thinking to myself:
"Why do people bother arguing with this stuff?"
It's so awesome hearing the complex pattern of events that occurred to give rise to something like life. I love it. It's SO much better than the silly answer of 'goddidit'.

Some theists argue that in fact this process even happening is because of the very beginning. In other words a deist might remark that God put the components in place to become this.

A simple analogue might be something like saying "God formed you in the womb". Well, he made everything possible so you could be formed. Sort of like saying "food is from the supermarket" instead of "food is from farmers".

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12432
  • Darwins +289/-32
  • Gender: Male
The deist position does not argue against the "stuff" that Freak refers to, so that doesn't answer his post.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline JTW

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1983
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
It does because deists believe God set things in motion then went all "hands-off" after that. So on a technicality God still created abiogenesis.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12432
  • Darwins +289/-32
  • Gender: Male
The deist position is that God created the universe and then went "hands-off", so as I said, it in no way argues against any of the scientific findings re: abiogenesis or evolution.

If someone asks "Why do some people who believe X argue against Y?" and you respond "Well, what about people who believe X and don't argue against Y?", you havn't answered the "why" of the original question.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.