|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Transition from chemistry to biology | |||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
I have something for you,so that you may gain some insight.Please read.1."The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is at present,still an article of faith."-Mathematician J.W.N.Sullivan.2."The probability of life origanating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unbridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."--Biologist Edwin Conklin.3."An honest man armed with all the knowledge available to us now,could only state that in some sense,the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle."--Biologist Francis Crick.4"If one is not prejudiced either by social belief or scientific traning into the conviction that life originated on the earth this simple calculation [the mathemathical difficulties that evolutionary confronts]wipes the idea entirely out of court"--Astronomers Fred Hoyle and N.C. Wickramasinghe.You imply that I dont understand,that notion is not new to me when Galileo present his theory he was even called a fool(I think Im fortunate than him,since so far nobody called me a fool.)When Neils Henrik Abel present his mathemathical theory the great mathemathician Gauss called him a "crank".I think calling somebody a fool or branded them ignorant because they dont share the majorities believe is due to psychological reason.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4744 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
I have something for you,so that you may gain some insight. Not everyone is a uninformed as you are. You offer no insite here. Your list has been so often repeated and refuted the acronym PRATTS (Points Refuted A Thousand TimeS)has been applied to them.
The probability of life origanating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unbridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop. Yeah! And a mechanic in a shop and a tornado in a junk yard have the same odds of putting together an engine by your math. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Would you please give some clear cut explanation?Let me ask you,what Pasteur did or what did he mean when he said "never will the doctrine of spontaneous genaration recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment"Nakasabot ka ana nga experiment or wala(need an interpreter?)Does it not sound death to the idea that a living thing is come from a non living thing? You are correct english is not my first language.But it does not mean that I dont understand english .Some of my grammar is wrong because of carelessness and pressure.Magsige man kag lipat lipat doi sakpan naka oi angkon na lang gyod.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
As I've already told you Pasteur's experiment was all about the controversy over whether (modern) microorganisms caused decay or were the product of decay. His statement asserted that his experiment conclusively proved that the former was true and that the latter was false.
Given the nature of the experiment there is simply no way that it could rule out modern ideas of abiogenesis. So all you are doing is insulting Pasteur's memory by painting him as a fool who completely failed to understand the limits of his own experiment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4744 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Would you please give some clear cut explanation?Let me ask you,what Pasteur did or what did he mean when he said "never will the doctrine of spontaneous genaration recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment" What he meant was that never will the doctrine of spontaneous genaration recover from the mortal blow struck by his simple experiment. He was likely correct. The confusion is yours of what spontaneous generation is. Can I define spontaneous generation as "kissing ones sister" and argue Pasteur showed incest to be impossible? AbE: You are correct english is not my first language.But it does not mean that I dont understand english .Some of my grammar is wrong because of carelessness and pressure. If you know this don't you think it's a bit rich to be calling people liars when misunderstanding is so likely?
Magsige man kag lipat lipat doi sakpan naka oi angkon na lang gyod. What a horrible thing to say. I spit on you. Edited by lyx2no, : No reason given. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
I dont know what you are talking about.Uninformed?Maybe, but you are only good in assertions.So go ahead show me a house that builds to a process that tears down.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Spontaneous genaration is the idea that a living thing is come from a non living thing isnt it?Would you say that I am wrong because english is not my first language?Even if I have a point you will easily refute that point by saying english is not your first language that is why you dont understand.Thats it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4744 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
I dont know what you are talking about.Uninformed? Sort of makes my, point don't you think?
. but you are only good in assertions. What evidence would you require of me to prove to you that your English isn't top notch?
So go ahead show me a house that builds to a process that tears down. You keep swearing at me in Bulgarian and I'll report you. Show me a house with a metabolism and reproductive cycle and I see what I can do for you. Edited by lyx2no, : Spelling 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Spit?You dont even understand what kind of language it is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Then prove that I swear you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4744 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Spontaneous genaration is the idea that a living thing is come from a non living thing isnt it? For the umpteenth time, NO! Thanking Bluejay in Message 136: Spontaneous generation was a hypothesis about how organisms reproduce. It suggested that some animal reproduction (ontogeny) was accomplished by the environment, instead of by sex or cell division. That is, some animals were born from leaf litter, water, rotting carcasses or dirt. This concept calls for a mechanism that allows decaying matter to be transformed into an animal by means of a pre-existing template. At least pretend that you read what others write.
Abiogenesis is the common idea underlying many hypotheses about the origin of the very first life form. In simplest terms, "abiogenesis" basically means that, at some point, there was a first life form, and, since no life predated that life form, that life form could only have come from something other than a pre-existing life form. This concept has no templates: it is a haphazard compilation of random elements into something workable. Would you say that I am wrong because english is not my first language? I say you're wrong because "spontaneous generation" has a meaning that you are ignoring for reasons known only to you, which introduces nothing but confusion.
Even if I have a point you will easily refute that point by saying english is not your first language that is why you dont understand. I'd enjoy very much if you made a point. I live to gain new understanding. Matter of fact, if I ever make lots of money on some kind of block buster invention I'll leave the money to a foundation in my will that grants an annual prize to the best scientific discoveries in half a dozen disciplines. But they'll have to do better then a PRATTAbE: to messages 219 and 220. Firstly, you waste a lot of space with three words per posts. Secondly, I don't even know if it is a language. Awful silly to pretend I understand what it is well enough to accuse you of stuff when I don't even know if it's a language, hun? At least I understand that. Edited by lyx2no, : No reason given. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
I say you're wrong because "spontaneous generation" has a meaning that you are ignoring for reasons known only to you, which introduces nothing but confusion. (You have a lot of digareement with your sentence,you said before that I dont understand simply because english is not my first language and now you are giving me a different reason?And you even post some words to test my understanding in english.what a great liar you are?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4744 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
(You have a lot of digareement with your sentence,you said before that I dont understand simply because english is not my first language and now you are giving me a different reason?And you even post some words to test my understanding in english.what a great liar you are?) As a fact I would not know why you are unable to understand even the simplest of points. My suggestion that your unfamiliarity with the English language could be the barrier was giving you the benefit of the doubt. There is currently no evidence that you're not just an idiot, and a case could be made that you are. For sake of clarity I'm willing to recant my prior reasons and attribute your profound inability to grasp simple concepts to you being a complete and utter butt wipe.
what a great liar you are? English tip of the day: Your preceding sentence is not interrogatory but declarative. It should end in a period. I'm more then willing to show patience with your poor use of English, but you must also take it into account with the problems we're having communicating. Now, while I enjoy the ragfest, we need to straighten out why you insist on equating "spontaneous generation" with "abiogenesis". In a argument if the first party (P1) express a distaste for jelly beans the second party (P2) cannot define jelly bean as peanut M&M's and then say P1 expressed a distaste for peanut M&M's. P1 did not. For the P2's statement to be true P2 must imply the same thing with the term "jelly bean" as did P1: even if P1 was referring to Raisinettes. P2 can argue that definitions need to be clarified, of course, but not if P1 is dead. In the instant argument P1 is L. Pasteur. When LP made his statement he very well may have unwisely defined "spontaneous generation", but everybody is stuck with that because LP is now dead. Furthermore, You keep defining SP as life coming from non-life. Pasteur used meat broth in his experiments. Currently dead, but not non-life. So your definition doesn't even agree with your definition. Edited by lyx2no, : Correct patients per cavediver. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3671 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
I'm more then willing to show patients with your poor use of English Show them what, exactly? When critiquing one's use of language, please ensure one's own is exemplary
we need to straighten out why you insist on equating "spontaneous generation" with "abiogenesis" The only way these can be equated is by total ignorance of the subject, abject stupidity, or complete dishonesty. There aren't many other creationist arguments that will cause me to so readily dismiss the creationist as a fool not worth my time. The fact that traste claims such an educated background simply makes the situation all the worse. And even if Pasteur had inteneded to imply that life in all circumstances will never arise from non-life, then so what? If he did, then he was simply an over-reaching idiot, irrespective of the truth or falseness of his statement. But I think we are equally sure that Pasteur was no idiot, and that he meant no such thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
And what is an example of natural selection mathemathical model?Can you provide some? Read any textbook on genetics.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024