Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Evolution/Creation debate


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Evolution/Creation debate Page: <<   < prev  18 19 [20] 21 22   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 2:14:50 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
What mask?

The bearded, old testament mask that flooded the earth because everybody who wasn't a relative of Noah was showing insufficient gusto in kissing its wearer's arse.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
And what makes you think I'm a churchgoer?

Most of what you've posted in religion threads while we've both been on here. What else?

< Message edited by Moonhead -- 2/13/2014 2:16:48 PM >

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 381
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 2:15:36 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: egern


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

And if you actually understood biochemistry you would have no doubt that there was a single origin for all life on earth. For instance all life on Earth shares essentially the same DNA to amino acid codon correspondence which is not something that would occur with separate origins.

My apologies. It was just a crazy idea of mine, not something that would ever occur to anyone who knew what they were talking about.


So you went and found one contrarian. Big fucking deal.

Now for an injection of reality.
All life shares:
The same metabolic mechanism
The same genetic coding mechanisms including the same genetic code
The same way of doing all the basic functions of life.

How could all of that be possible if we did not all share a common ancestor?

The very possibility for horizontal transfer of genetic material, one of the arguments used by your quote, requires a universal common ancestor.



Or is it just that according to circumstances in which life developed it had to be along those lines?

I agree with you egern. I tried to make this point earlier. DNA has just gotta be DNA. There is no reason to think it did not develop many times in different locals of the early hospitable earth and that many of the combinations wet awry. The odds (of reason) favor multiple beginnings before the present form was successful.

(in reply to egern)
Profile   Post #: 382
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 2:27:34 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline 		Have they found evidence of odd dna combinations that have split off the main track anywhere? I doubt that microbiologists have been able to extract any dna samples from the weird freakazoids in the Burgess shale, but what about the odd microecologies around deep sea vents? Have those taken as odd a term in their dna's development as they have in everything else?

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 383
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 3:00:28 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Ah, the clumsily played non-answer answer. Still waiting, Kirata. Anytime. Why is it that attributing rational mind to an "unseen reality" is not anthropomorphizing? Why is it not a god by another name? You made the assertion. You invented the rational unseen. Justify your philosophy if you can.

My argument for my position was in my post. So how about you offering an argument for your position that what I (actually) said constitutes "anthropomorphizing" and "god by another name," instead of just repeating those claims with an insult on top?

And while you're at it, which word in the phrase, does not require a "being," didn't you understand?

K.



< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/13/2014 3:32:30 PM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 384
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 3:15:39 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
What mask?

The bearded, old testament mask that flooded the earth because everybody who wasn't a relative of Noah was showing insufficient gusto in kissing its wearer's arse.

And that or anything like it is in my post where, precisely?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
And what makes you think I'm a churchgoer?

Most of what you've posted in religion threads while we've both been on here.

You mean like this one?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

What else?

What else, indeed. But I think we have a clue now.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/13/2014 3:33:35 PM >

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 385
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 3:58:45 PM   
graceadieu


Posts: 1518
Joined: 3/20/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
I agree with you egern. I tried to make this point earlier. DNA has just gotta be DNA. There is no reason to think it did not develop many times in different locals of the early hospitable earth and that many of the combinations wet awry. The odds (of reason) favor multiple beginnings before the present form was successful.


Self-replicating RNA (genetic material simpler than DNA) will spontaneously form from organic molecules in the right conditions, so it seems likely to me that there was a lot of different proto-life stuff going on in the early oceans before the development of functional cells. And then... where's the line between life and non-life? Is free-floating genetic material "alive" if it can reproduce? Or is it not alive until it's a cell?

It does, from what I recall (sorry, former bio major here, but that was almost 10 years ago) look like all cellular organisms are descended from a common ancestor. But there's a staggering amount of diversity among primitive single-celled organisms, too. Also: it looks like a lot of those primitive organisms can just swap genes around between unrelated species or even incorporate stuff from their environment. That makes it hard to classify them or create evolutionary lineages, since species end up sharing DNA or RNA with species that are only distantly related to them.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 386
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 4:21:13 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Have they found evidence of odd dna combinations that have split off the main track anywhere? I doubt that microbiologists have been able to extract any dna samples from the weird freakazoids in the Burgess shale, but what about the odd microecologies around deep sea vents? Have those taken as odd a term in their dna's development as they have in everything else?

There is zero evidence for more than one common ancestor.

There is no biochemical reason that the ribosomes should attach any particular amino acid to the protein being built based on which mRNA codon is being read. Therefore even if nucleic acids are the only possible way to transmit biological information they specific coding which life on Earth uses is arbitrary. That indicates a single origin. This is why people who know the details do not doubt the single origin theory.

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 387
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 4:25:29 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

There is zero evidence for more than one common ancestor.

You're making shit up again.

K.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 388
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 5:45:19 PM   
epiphiny43


Posts: 688
Joined: 10/20/2006
Status: offline 		Why are we arguing Evolution with people who call it bisexual reproduction and obviously have no actual understanding of sexual reproduction, gene donation by each parent and DNA/messengerRNA/RNA cellular biology?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 389
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 5:53:39 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

Why are we arguing Evolution with people who call it bisexual reproduction and obviously have no actual understanding of sexual reproduction, gene donation by each parent and DNA/messengerRNA/RNA cellular biology?

I put it down to us just being good community service minded people.

K.

(in reply to epiphiny43)
Profile   Post #: 390
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 7:14:51 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

There is zero evidence for more than one common ancestor.

You're making shit up again.

K.


Speculation is not evidence. Maybe you should brush up on your English,.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 391
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/13/2014 7:16:32 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

Why are we arguing Evolution with people who call it bisexual reproduction and obviously have no actual understanding of sexual reproduction, gene donation by each parent and DNA/messengerRNA/RNA cellular biology?

I put it down to us just being good community service minded people.

K.


How would you know. You didn't know enough to discuss the codon to ribosome relationship.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 392
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 6:27:16 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Ah, the clumsily played non-answer answer. Still waiting, Kirata. Anytime. Why is it that attributing rational mind to an "unseen reality" is not anthropomorphizing? Why is it not a god by another name? You made the assertion. You invented the rational unseen. Justify your philosophy if you can.

My argument for my position was in my post. So how about you offering an argument for your position that what I (actually) said constitutes "anthropomorphizing" and "god by another name," instead of just repeating those claims with an insult on top?

And while you're at it, which word in the phrase, does not require a "being," didn't you understand?

K.



Bullshit. You gave no argument in your post. You just took a leap from observed orderly Nature to an unseen rational reality. Christians call that God. How is your unseen rational reality any different?

< Message edited by vincentML -- 2/14/2014 6:36:17 AM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 393
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 8:26:56 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

which word in the phrase, does not require a "being," didn't you understand?

You just took a leap from observed orderly Nature to an unseen rational reality. Christians call that God.

Desperation is never pretty, Vincent.

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 2/14/2014 9:04:52 AM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 394
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 9:52:53 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43
Why are we arguing Evolution with people who call it bisexual reproduction and obviously have no actual understanding of sexual reproduction, gene donation by each parent and DNA/messengerRNA/RNA cellular biology?


Yes the guy's a Biblical literalist who was clearly lying about the scientific magazines and actually getting his nonsense from the dumbest form of creationism known to man and the "atheist" was probably an atheist the same was Christine O'donnell was a witch.

So I wouldn't blame you for hitting ignore on his ass but consider that if we didn't explain to this guy that he's ignorant of the actual theory at even the most basic level it's entirely likely that no one ever would.

You might ask why should we care? My answer is for the same reason that Richard Dawkins feels compelled to come to this country to argue against creationist nonsense, the same reason Bill Nye felt he had to go to the Flinstones are real museum. Because there are enough people confident in their ignorance and motivated by their nonsense to break biology education. That has real consequences for all of us.

(in reply to epiphiny43)
Profile   Post #: 395
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 11:49:50 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

which word in the phrase, does not require a "being," didn't you understand?

You just took a leap from observed orderly Nature to an unseen rational reality. Christians call that God.

Desperation is never pretty, Vincent.

K.

Evasion signals a lack of sustentative thought, Kirata.


< Message edited by vincentML -- 2/14/2014 11:53:45 AM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 396
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 1:48:54 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Evasion signals a lack of sustentative thought, Kirata.

Oh my goodness, am I going to die?

K.


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 397
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 1:52:55 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		So far in life, we don't actually know anybody who didn't do it.  So, resounding yes on the worms shall be your bed and maggots your covering thingie.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 398
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 2:01:46 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So far in life, we don't actually know anybody who didn't do it.  So, resounding yes on the worms shall be your bed and maggots your covering thingie.

Maybe so, but I'm still going to get right on that sustentative thought thing.

K.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 399
RE: Evolution/Creation debate - 2/14/2014 2:02:21 PM   
epiphiny43


Posts: 688
Joined: 10/20/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Evasion signals a lack of substantive thought, Kirata.(Fixed that for you: epiphin43)

Oh my goodness, am I going to die?

K.



Yes, you are going to die.
And the list of educational deficiencies just keeps growing.

< Message edited by epiphiny43 -- 2/14/2014 2:04:01 PM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 400
Page:   <<   < prev  18 19 [20] 21 22   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Evolution/Creation debate Page: <<   < prev  18 19 [20] 21 22   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125