|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Some abiogenesis considerations | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
traste Member (Idle past 5168 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
ramoss wrote:
Here is a web site that has a lot of information about the evidence for common decent They are just bluffing. Take note that the genetic code is not universal. 
Edited by traste, : wrong spelling Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
traste Member (Idle past 5168 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Nighttrain wrote:
Behe`s nonsense has been thoroughly debunked on numerous sites. Try Talk Origins or Panda`s Thumb for openers. So, far no sites has been able to prove that life is not irreduicible complex. The good proof must be to produced a bacteria flaggelum wih out a flaggela. And the site you are talking about has been debunked by intelligent design site.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
traste Member (Idle past 5168 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Cosmic Chimp wrote:
You're making provocative and more importantly unsupported statements Im not, you are.
I'm curious about what you mean regarding the genetic code not being universal. Where's your support on that? "Bluffing," indeed. Its not my problem if you dont know what universal is. It's your job to check what I say. The evidence is mounting that the genetic code is not universal,unless you are uninformed like razd. Yeah, the critics of Behe's work are just bluffing, they are unable to produced a bacteria flagellum without a flaggela.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
traste Member (Idle past 5168 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
bluescat48 wrote:
And which site is that? Do research,its not my job to provide you those sites. Yet, I assure they exist.
Edited by traste, : wrong spelling Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
traste Member (Idle past 5168 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
RAZD wrote:
And yet it has been demonstrated that (a) IC is a prediction of evolution, and (b) it has been observed to evolve My reply is a very long,eeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkkkk.  . Evolution is a gradual addition of parts not sudden appearance of parts. Therefore we can say that IC is againts the prediction of evolution.
What IDists have failed to do is demonstrate that IC cannot be due to evolution Behe, Dembski and many other scientist already demonstrated it. I still have class.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
