 rammo34
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1063 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 29, 2010 7:45:35 AM
WHY AREN'T THEIR DINOSAURS IN MY PEANUT BUTTER? |
|
 Tiger86
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
65 Posts
|
Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:47:10 AM
1. New life cannot emerge because life originally formed through specific processes, which are difficult to re-create and even more difficult to validate.
2. If that's not enough, they're also ignoring that current life on all scales hinder the creation of "new" life so as to make something which is almost impossible even more unlikely.
3. Macroevolution is not the same as microevolution. While macroevolution arises from microevolution, disproving microevolution or the non-divine creation of life would still ignore the similarities between life-forms that macroevolution is based on. |
|
 irbord
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
33 Posts
|
Friday, October 08, 2010 2:29:14 PM
Spontaneous generation? wtf happened to that 1 guy? we disproved that soooo long ago.. |
|
 lastrogue
Male, 18-29, Western US
178 Posts
|
Tuesday, October 05, 2010 6:23:57 PM
something about this reminds me of the dark ages and the catholic church during the period of the dark ages. |
|
bnimp
Male, 18-29, Western US
29 Posts
|
Monday, October 04, 2010 11:18:32 PM
Lol |
|
 great_blaise
Male, 18-29, Western US
134 Posts
|
Monday, October 04, 2010 6:00:11 PM
Oh my god these people are so ignorant it hurts my soul...
But seriously! OMG this is freaking hilarious! It's so blatantly obvious that he knows absolutely nothing about the actual theory and science behind it! OVERLY RELIGIOUS NUTJOBS FTW!!!! |
|
 Freelop
Male, 18-29, Europe
449 Posts
|
Monday, October 04, 2010 2:17:39 PM
I was really expecting one of those "EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE" things at the end. |
|
dang007
Male, 30-39, Southern US
489 Posts
|
Monday, October 04, 2010 2:15:29 PM
Every so often when I read IAB I die a little inside..... |
|
 DRxSATANx
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
322 Posts
|
Monday, October 04, 2010 12:05:04 AM
what a moron |
|
 5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16961 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 10:02:02 PM
"None of the scientists involved created the amino acids by the power of their will"
Um sorry Angilion, but that's a reach, eh? Do you know all the 'laws of the universe'? ALL of them? Can you explain "non-locality"?
I can't either!
So until then, lets keeps "science" and "speculation" widely seperated, eh? Like Eskimo9 said, those experiments don't "prove" squat... and I don't think it was "alive" anyhow... |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16961 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 9:55:41 PM
Peanuts are living organisms so what he's really talking about is the impossibility of resurrection. - athelstanrex
HAHAHAHAHAHAH!
(see, ressurection is the cornerstone of Christian theology)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! FTW!
(I laughed SO much!) |
|
 3002-3038
Female, 18-29, Western US
480 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 4:11:56 PM
would've been awesome if someone had somehow managed to stick a gerbil or something inside that jar of peanutbutter. |
|
 PierreJeanFR
Male, 40-49, Europe
1336 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 3:00:03 PM
I can't believe it's not evolution!
They try so hard to make their case they are pathetic.
They remind me of holocaust negativists. |
|
PierreJeanFR
Male, 40-49, Europe
1336 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 2:51:42 PM
i can't believe it's not evolution! |
|
 k-two
Male, 40-49, Europe
112 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 12:43:51 PM
Every canned food is a life form which has been thoroughly killed and preserved by the food industry for a rather limited amount of time, if compared to the age of the universe. In fact, every jar of peanut butter contains plenty of microorganisms which, if left alone long enough, will multiply and colonize it.
As Athelstanrex pointed out correctly: If this proves anything, it's that ressurection does not happen. It seems like none of God's creatures which have been murdered by industry has ever found mercy in his eyes. You better don't believe you will ... |
|
 Rick_S
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
2860 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 10:01:37 AM
Three flaws in his theory. 1) The amount of energy says is required to form new life is never applied to the peanut butter. 2) The type of matter that science says is necessary to form is not in the peanut butter. 3) The type of life science says is formed by the right amount of energy applied to the right type of matter is microscopic, and you would never see with the naked eye.
Not that I'm arguing for or against evolution, just that I'm pointing out that his argument is invalid. |
|
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
9554 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 9:55:49 AM
The experiments referred to don't require the scientists' involvement. The scientists are not the creators. None of the scientists involved created the amino acids by the power of their will, magic spells or whatever. There was no-one saying "Let there be amino acids" and lo! there was.
In order to prove your assertion that the experiments are invalid, you would have to prove that the conditions could not have occured naturally at any time, not that the conditions were set up in this case by people. If I build a machine that creates lightning, does that prove lightning is created by gods? |
|
 eskimo9
Male, 18-29, Australia
710 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 7:02:23 AM
@green_batman - unfortunately those experiments are invalid, as they involve the interference of a higher power (scientists). I'm not going to deny that science created life and evolution formed it, I'm suggesting that science and God are one and same.
I have no opinion on what came before the Big Bang, or whatever the kids are calling it nowadays, but the stories presented by humans have to start somewhere, and the beginning of our 'cycle' as you put it, seems a good place to start. |
|
 TokioKoos
Female, 18-29, Europe
415 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 4:37:55 AM
Wat. |
|
athelstanrex
Male, 50-59, Europe
10 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 3:44:08 AM
Peanuts are living organisms so what he's really talking about is the impossibility of resurrection. |
|
 green_batman
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
730 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 12:13:38 AM
Of course it took quite a bit longer than that the create more complex life forms, but, given that it doesn't take that much to link together amino acids and create a sequence that could be a functional protein, it's not unlikely that more complex life would eventually form. |
|
green_batman
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
730 Posts
|
Sunday, October 03, 2010 12:13:30 AM
Here's my 2 cents: The universe is eternal. Not the current cycle of it, which starts from the Big Bang, but there is some form of existence that has potential to form into a universe like our own that has been around forever. Spinoza called this eternal being God, but that's really a matter of semantics.
Evolution is not the same as the origin of life. Evolution is the manner in which life changes over time. However, the Miller-Urey experiment took common non-living matter, pumped it full of energy, and within a week, there were amino acids present in the container. Amino acids, for those of you unfamiliar with biochemistry, are the building blocks of proteins. Proteins are the chemicals that are responsible for every single function that occurs in your body. |
|
 Sistarose
Female, 30-39, Australia
371 Posts
|
Saturday, October 02, 2010 9:09:51 PM
It needs a bannana, cause peanut butter added to a bannanna is yummy. |
|
 Salted_Eggs
Male, 18-29, Western US
773 Posts
|
Saturday, October 02, 2010 8:31:20 PM
You did not give it 2.5 billion years.
Your argument is invalid. |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
854 Posts
|
Saturday, October 02, 2010 8:15:49 PM
the multi-verse has just always existed. there was no beginning and there will be no end. |
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}