Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8945 total)
32 online now:
dwise1, PaulK, Percy (Admin), RAZD, ringo, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (6 members, 26 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Upcoming Birthdays: ONESOlivia, perfect
Post Volume: Total: 865,398 Year: 20,434/19,786 Month: 831/2,023 Week: 339/392 Day: 29/41 Hour: 3/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the source of life
homunculus
Member (Idle past 3749 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 16 of 211 (495612)
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


-Law of Providence-
Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), sources for all happenings and effects being caused.

Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.


Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by AdminNosy, posted 01-23-2009 4:48 PM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 18 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 4:49 PM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 19 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 5:04 PM homunculus has responded
 Message 20 by DrJones*, posted 01-23-2009 6:22 PM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 21 by lyx2no, posted 01-23-2009 9:38 PM homunculus has responded
 Message 23 by RAZD, posted 01-23-2009 11:18 PM homunculus has responded
 Message 28 by Huntard, posted 01-24-2009 3:11 AM homunculus has not yet responded

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 17 of 211 (495613)
01-23-2009 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Reply Button
Please use the reply button on the lower right of the post you are replying to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has not yet responded

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 2893 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 18 of 211 (495614)
01-23-2009 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
homunculus writes:

Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), sources for all happenings and effects being caused.

Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.

Right, so then we're done, I suppose? Anything you haven't seen happening with your own eyes is impossible.

Next!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 211 (495618)
01-23-2009 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), sources for all happenings and effects being caused.
Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.

Bullshit.

A long long long time ago, there were not even atoms in the Universe so it was physically impossible for life to exist. Life exists today. Therefore, at some point life had to spontaneously generate from non-life.

The only way that is wrong is if life has existed forever. But we know that isn't true.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 6:14 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1984
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 20 of 211 (495639)
01-23-2009 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens.

Really? When did you complete this exhaustive survey of the entire universe and where can I see the published data?


soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has not yet responded

  
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 3030 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 21 of 211 (495673)
01-23-2009 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


-What Law of Providence is That?-
Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.

Don't be so sure. It could be happening several million times a day and getting eaten just as quickly. How would we recognize it? If these neo-biota take months to copy themselves we'd never be able to sort it out from the noise unless we knew exactly what to look for.

BTW, if the Universe guarantees something, it's called natural. It's called supernatural when pixies guarantees it.


Genesis 2
17 But of the ponderosa pine, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou shinniest thereof thou shalt sorely learn of thy nakedness.
18 And we all live happily ever after.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 6:20 AM lyx2no has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3840
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 22 of 211 (495689)
01-23-2009 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by bluescat48
01-23-2009 2:05 PM


homunculus writes:

Figurative to illustrate; 1 mile closer to the sun we would burn up, 1 mile further away we would freeze.


Where did you pick up this statement which is totally debunked before it is stated. Since the earth's orbit is an ellipse with the sun a on focus, there is about a 3 million mile difference in distance at the aphelion to the perihelion, aphelion 94.5 million miles, perihelion 91.5 million miles. That is a lot more than 1. Your point sound like a hovindism (something stupid that Kent Hovind would say)

I'm replying this to your post since homunculus apparently removed that claim after your reply to him.

Yes, it is indeed true that over the year the earth's distance from the sun varies by 3 million miles and that does indeed debunk his and creationists'/IDists' false claim that the slightest shift in the earth's distance would eitehr make it too hot or too cold for life to exist. But you forgot the icing on the cake, especially then the creationist/IDist lives in the Northern Hemisphere.

The earth is at perihelion, its closest approach to the sun, in the first week of January, in the dead of winter. I'm sure that homunculus (assuming he lives in the northern hemisphere) has been outside this month and has noticed how intensely hot it's been, too hot for any life to exist. Just as I'm sure that in the beginning of June, when we're farthest away from the sun, he could not help but notice how all life was frozen dead from the surface of the earth ... at least when he could wipe the sweat from his eyes.

Isn't it amazing how much embaressment they could avoid if they were to only stop to learn something first?

Edited by dwise1, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by bluescat48, posted 01-23-2009 2:05 PM bluescat48 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by bluescat48, posted 01-23-2009 11:22 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20244
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 23 of 211 (495694)
01-23-2009 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
Hey homunculus,

Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), ...

Right, so what happens when we look back to 3,600,000,000 years ago?

4,000,000,000 years ago?

4,400,000,000 years ago?

Spontaneous Generation has never happened.

Ah yes, the misunderstanding of Louis Pasteur and his fellow scientists. Spontaneous Generation of decay causing bacteria and fly larva disproved by experiments that curiously don't replicate primordial conditions and only last a couple of days.

Actually all those many experiments proved and confirmed was that decay was not spontaneous. When dead matter was put in sterile conditions it did not decay. This also led to the discovery that bacteria cause what is called decay by breaking down the proteins in the dead matter.

Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.

And this is why the earth orbits the sun1 .... Wonderful.

Enjoy



1 - sun: a rather small and insignificant star in one of the outer arms of a galaxy that is just like many other galaxies, a real stand-out.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 6:46 AM RAZD has responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2503 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 24 of 211 (495695)
01-23-2009 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by dwise1
01-23-2009 10:47 PM


Isn't it amazing how much embaressment they could avoid if they were to only stop to learn something first?

Yes, I agree. If they would learn something, maybe then we could deal with important issues.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by dwise1, posted 01-23-2009 10:47 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
homunculus
Member (Idle past 3749 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 25 of 211 (495707)
01-24-2009 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Larni
01-23-2009 5:10 AM


Re: Goldilocks
Yes, life can flourish in just about every place on the earth. But, as stated in the providential law, it is limited to the earth. my assertion is comparing the rationality of supernatural intercession with spontaneous generation.

As per the argument, I noted that life on earth exists on a delicate balance of global position, climate and atmospheric gases.

the atmosphere is 'all too conveniently' some 75 - 77% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 1 - 3% carbon dioxide as well as other gasses in the atmosphere represent the ideal figures necessary for the survival of living beings, consequently separating earth's ecosystem from the vacuum of space.

earths global position sets about 90 million miles from the sun, according to the "experts". earth's solar distance measures max difference of about 5 million miles. astronomically speaking, 5 million miles isn't an extreme range of distance, considering the sometimes visible Mar's average distance of 140 million miles to the sun. Differing range of 50 million miles to earth.

Back to the point at hand, earth houses life on a plain of pain staking balances. In addition to the much needed conditions for life on earth, according to evolution, life would have needed to spontaneously generate, as per the conditions or nigh.

The problem with spontaneous generation, again, is that it has never been observed or had evidential facts documented. Since there is no other life in 'observable space', we can safely assume that, according to evolution, spontaneous generation would've had to have taken place due to earth's global specific environs.

Sadly, No such spontaneous generation observed or evidence documented, again. Thus, making spontaneous generation entirely speculation, which happens to be a founding principle of Evolution. This principle, as well as the rest of them (not confusing Evolution with 'adaptation' or 'science of immutable change over time', I like to separate the weeds from the crop), is entirely speculation.

Finally, until life does spontaneously generate, either on this planet or on another, I'm ruling that 'living' organic provision is required, which ultimately, not only suggests the supernatural, it requires it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Larni, posted 01-23-2009 5:10 AM Larni has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Taz, posted 01-24-2009 2:45 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 29 by Huntard, posted 01-24-2009 3:29 AM homunculus has responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1605 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 26 of 211 (495715)
01-24-2009 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by homunculus
01-24-2009 2:06 AM


Re: Goldilocks
homunculus writes:

Yes, life can flourish in just about every place on the earth. But, as stated in the providential law, it is limited to the earth. my assertion is comparing the rationality of supernatural intercession with spontaneous generation.


You're using a lot of big words to put together a bullshit argument. First of all, you're making an assertion about the universe based on 1 single data point: Earth.

As per the argument, I noted that life on earth exists on a delicate balance of global position, climate and atmospheric gases.

Delicate balance? Bullshit! Even if tomorrow the Earth is completely deprived of oxygen, it would still be teeming with life. It will be a completely different biosphere than what we know now, but life will go on.

the atmosphere is 'all too conveniently' some 75 - 77% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 1 - 3% carbon dioxide as well as other gasses in the atmosphere represent the ideal figures necessary for the survival of living beings, consequently separating earth's ecosystem from the vacuum of space.

Again, you have convieniently ignored what other posters have stated, so let me state this again.

You are looking at a pothole filled with water and claiming that the pothole was somehow designed to fit the shape of the water in the pothole now.

The Earth happened to have such combination of gases in the atmosphere. Life adapted to such conditions. Those that didn't adapt died out.

earths global position sets about 90 million miles from the sun, according to the "experts". earth's solar distance measures max difference of about 5 million miles. astronomically speaking, 5 million miles isn't an extreme range of distance, considering the sometimes visible Mar's average distance of 140 million miles to the sun. Differing range of 50 million miles to earth.

Again, have you even heard of extremophiles?

And whatever happened to the 1 mile difference bullshit argument?

Back to the point at hand, earth houses life on a plain of pain staking balances. In addition to the much needed conditions for life on earth, according to evolution, life would have needed to spontaneously generate, as per the conditions or nigh.

What the hell are you talking about? (1) Evolution doesn't have anything to do with abiogenesis. (2) You are still looking at the pothole filled with water and claiming that the pothole is somehow designed to fit the current shape of the water.

The problem with spontaneous generation, again, is that it has never been observed or had evidential facts documented. Since there is no other life in 'observable space', we can safely assume that, according to evolution, spontaneous generation would've had to have taken place due to earth's global specific environs.

You're still using a lot of big words to make a bullshit argument.

You are making a cosmic claim based on 1 single data point. You're proposing that life can only exist in current observable conditions on Earth, nevermind the fact that we haven't been able to go anywhere else to collect any data.

If you have data from other places in the cosmos that I'm not aware of, please share.

Finally, until life does spontaneously generate, either on this planet or on another, I'm ruling that 'living' organic provision is required, which ultimately, not only suggests the supernatural, it requires it.

Why stop there? Don't even bother to go to school. Goddunit seems to answer everything, doesn't it? Don't waste your time learning algebra, chemistry, thermodynamics, and a kazillion other subjects not using the goddunit approach.

Jesus Christ University - where you get an automatic A for being able to write "goddunit" in every answer box on the exams.

Added by edit.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 2:06 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 7:05 AM Taz has responded

  
monkey boy
Junior Member (Idle past 3763 days)
Posts: 24
Joined: 01-20-2009


Message 27 of 211 (495716)
01-24-2009 2:57 AM


observation
Is it just me? Or has anyone else noticed that homunculus keeps assertin the same things, in a slightly different form, That have already been demolished by his critics.

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Larni, posted 01-24-2009 7:18 AM monkey boy has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 609 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 28 of 211 (495717)
01-24-2009 3:11 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
homunculus writes:

Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), sources for all happenings and effects being caused.

Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.


If life can only come from life, where did the first life come from?

Further, we can observe new life emerging without the need for mating.

And as a final thought, there is absolutely NO evidence for the supernatural.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 609 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 29 of 211 (495719)
01-24-2009 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by homunculus
01-24-2009 2:06 AM


Re: Goldilocks
Homunculus writes:

Yes, life can flourish in just about every place on the earth. But, as stated in the providential law,


What law?

it is limited to the earth.

How do you know?

my assertion is comparing the rationality of supernatural intercession with spontaneous generation.

Well, since we have absolutely no evidence for the supernatural, yet we have some clues pointing to the natural, I'd say the natural is a bit ahead on this one.

As per the argument, I noted that life on earth exists on a delicate balance of global position, climate and atmospheric gases.

the atmosphere is 'all too conveniently' some 75 - 77% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 1 - 3% carbon dioxide as well as other gasses in the atmosphere represent the ideal figures necessary for the survival of living beings, consequently separating earth's ecosystem from the vacuum of space.

earths global position sets about 90 million miles from the sun, according to the "experts". earth's solar distance measures max difference of about 5 million miles. astronomically speaking, 5 million miles isn't an extreme range of distance, considering the sometimes visible Mar's average distance of 140 million miles to the sun. Differing range of 50 million miles to earth.


So why did you say: "1 mile closer to the sun and we would burn, 1 mile further and we would freeze."Which has been shown to be false for a very long time now? But this still doesn't matter. As I said, the Earth doesn't fit life perfectly, life fits the Earth perfectly.

Back to the point at hand

Ok

earth houses life on a plain of pain staking balances.

Wrong. Life has developed to fit those circumstances.

In addition to the much needed conditions for life on earth, according to evolution, life would have needed to spontaneously generate, as per the conditions or nigh.

Wrong. Evolution doesn't care how life began, it only comes into play after life has arisen.

The problem with spontaneous generation, again, is that it has never been observed or had evidential facts documented.

Then where did the first life come from, if it didn't come from other life?

Since there is no other life in 'observable space',

How do you know, have you seen everything in observable space? Do you even have any idea how BIG observable space is?

we can safely assume that, according to evolution, spontaneous generation would've had to have taken place due to earth's global specific environs.

Wrong. Evolution doesn't care how life began, it only comes into play after life has arisen.

Sadly, No such spontaneous generation observed or evidence documented, again.

then where did the first life come from?

Thus, making spontaneous generation entirely speculation, which happens to be a founding principle of Evolution.

Wrong. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with evolution.

This principle, as well as the rest of them (not confusing Evolution with 'adaptation' or 'science of immutable change over time', I like to separate the weeds from the crop), is entirely speculation.

What the hell are those other two things you bring up here? Evolution is the change of allele frequencies in a population over time. It ahs nothing to do with where the first life comes from, despite you claiming it again and again. Please check what the theory of evolution actually says, before attacking it and showing that you don't know what it says.

Finally, until life does spontaneously generate, either on this planet or on another, I'm ruling that 'living' organic provision is required, which ultimately, not only suggests the supernatural, it requires it.

Why is organic material "supernatural"? And again I ask you, if life can only come from life, where did the first life come from?


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 2:06 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 7:26 AM Huntard has responded

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 2307 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 30 of 211 (495720)
01-24-2009 3:30 AM


Dem rocks
Hi, HC. In a sense, life does come from non-life. While a life form may 'initiate' development of a replica, the copy will be 'constructed' from non-life, e.g. minerals. Take away the inorganics, no life. At least in the human body, apart from carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, we require:

Calcium - needed for muscle, heart and digestive system health, builds bone, supports synthesis and function of blood cells.

Chlorine (chloride) - needed for production of hydrochloric acid in the stomach and in cellular pump functions.

Cobalt - needed as a cofactor with vitamin B12. Prevents pernicious anemia.

Copper - required component of many redox enzymes, including cytochrome c oxidase.

Iodine - required for the biosynthesis of thyroxine.

Iron - required for many proteins and enzymes, notably hemoglobin.

Magnesium - required for processing ATP and for bones.

Manganese - a cofactor in enzyme functions.

Molybdenum - required as a cofactor for xanthine oxidase and related oxidases.

Nickel - required as a cofactor for urease.

Phosphorus - a component of bones (e.g., apatite), energy processing (e.g., ATP), and many other functions.

Potassium - a systemic electrolyte, essential in coregulating ATP with sodium.

Selenium - a cofactor essential to activity of antioxidant enzymes like glutathione peroxidase.

Sodium - a systemic electrolyte, essential in coregulating ATP with potassium.

Sulfur - Required in synthesizing amino acids cysteine and methionine.

Zinc - required for several enzymes such as carboxypeptidase, liver alcohol dehydrogenase, and carbonic anhydrase.

No other minerals have been proven essential, although chromium is often considered useful in sugar metabolism, and is taken as a supplement (chromium picolinate). Other trace minerals with unproven physiological functions include boron, bromine, silicon, tungsten, and vanadium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_mineral


Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 7:11 AM Nighttrain has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019