Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What's the problem with teaching ID?
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 196 of 337 (664435)
06-01-2012 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by jar
05-31-2012 10:41 PM


Re: Utter nonsense
but you see life could not have formed in the same environment we have today. It is too volatile the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere by itself is enough to disrupt the chemical reactions needed for abiogenesis. That is why many models state that earths early atmosphere had much less oxygen in it, but there is no other evidence to suggest what amount of oxygen was in the air 4 billion years ago. photosynthesis is a very common chemical reaction now but how common was it 4 billion years ago. I agree with you that chemical reaction happen the same way today as they always have but common chemical reactions change depending on when a where one looks. Were the chemical reactions needed for abiogenesis ever common? From my understanding of entropy simple chemicals such as amino acids don't usually form into more complex compounds like proteins, ribosomes, dna and rna by themselves. in fact the exact opposite is a common chemical reaction, complex parts break down to more simple ones.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by jar, posted 05-31-2012 10:41 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-01-2012 12:33 AM swensenpower has replied
 Message 198 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 12:56 AM swensenpower has replied
 Message 211 by Drosophilla, posted 06-01-2012 7:38 AM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 216 by jar, posted 06-01-2012 8:44 AM swensenpower has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 197 of 337 (664436)
06-01-2012 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by swensenpower
06-01-2012 12:13 AM


The origins of free Oxygen
That is why many models state that earths early atmosphere had much less oxygen in it, but there is no other evidence to suggest what amount of oxygen was in the air 4 billion years ago.
The origins of preCambrian Iron formations are believed to because of the origin of free oxygen in the atmosphere. Iron's reaction with the Oxygen caused it to precipitate out of solution.
The Wikipedia article: Banded iron formation
quote:
Banded iron formations (also known as banded ironstone formations or BIFs) are distinctive units of sedimentary rock that are almost always of Precambrian age. A typical BIF consists of repeated, thin layers of iron oxides, either magnetite (Fe3O4) or hematite (Fe2O3), alternating with bands of iron-poor shale and chert. Some of the oldest known rock formations, formed over 3,700 million years ago, include banded iron layers.
and
quote:
The formations are abundant around the time of the great oxygenation event,[2] 2,400 million years ago (mya or Ma), and become less common after 1,800 mya.
and
quote:
The conventional concept is that the banded iron layers were formed in sea water as the result of oxygen released by photosynthetic cyanobacteria (bluegreen algae), combining with dissolved iron in Earth's oceans to form insoluble iron oxides, which precipitated out, forming a thin layer on the substrate, which may have been anoxic mud (forming shale and chert). Each band is similar to a varve, to the extent that the banding is assumed to result from cyclic variations in available oxygen.
Caption for above at cited article: "2.1 billion year old banded iron formation"
I believe the 2.1 bya event is by far the most significant Iron formation event. That is the age of the great Iron formations in northern Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. I believe there is also 2.1 bya Iron formation in Wyoming.
There is other evidence such as tidal deposit sands and silts, and stromalites that indicate this Iron formation formed in shoreline environments.
Moose
Edited by Minnemooseus, : Add photo and material below photo.
Edited by Minnemooseus, : Make formula numbers subtext.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 12:13 AM swensenpower has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 3:08 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 198 of 337 (664437)
06-01-2012 12:56 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by swensenpower
06-01-2012 12:13 AM


Wow
Well, again I will leave most errors for others to correct, but I simply could not pass this by.
That is why many models state that earths early atmosphere had much less oxygen in it, but there is no other evidence to suggest what amount of oxygen was in the air 4 billion years ago. photosynthesis is a very common chemical reaction now but how common was it 4 billion years ago.
Wow.
As you may or may not be aware, photosynthesis is a process used by plants and some other organisms to convert energy from the sun to food. Think about that for a moment.
Your problem is that we don't know how much photosynthesis was going on 4 billion years ago and, thus, we don't know what the conditions on Earth were before life began.
Think about that just a bit more. If you don't see the glaring problem here, I'm quite certain you're not ready to talk to anyone about anything remotely related to science.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 12:13 AM swensenpower has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 1:35 AM subbie has replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 199 of 337 (664438)
06-01-2012 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by NoNukes
05-31-2012 2:55 PM


For me abiogenesis falls into the same category as ID. neither one has the scientific evidence to support it. Where is the evidence? Aristotle believed in spontaneous generation of life but by the 19 hundreds there was enough scientific observation to form the law of biogenesis and disprove the spontaneous generation of life. Back then we knew that life did not come from non living objects so why do we believe it today?
I believe the unanswerable question of "Where did life come from?" will remain that way. the best anyone could do is make a decision to put their faith in a scientist or a religion but be honest you do not know one way or the other. the scientist doesn't know for he has no substantial evidence. the religion doesn't know either. its all based on faith so maybe both should not be taught in school.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by NoNukes, posted 05-31-2012 2:55 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 1:17 AM swensenpower has replied
 Message 214 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2012 8:39 AM swensenpower has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 200 of 337 (664439)
06-01-2012 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by swensenpower
06-01-2012 1:10 AM


maybe both should not be taught in school.
I've asked you twice, now. Exactly what is it that you think that they are teaching in school that you disagree with? Please provide evidence to support your claim.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 1:10 AM swensenpower has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 2:06 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied
 Message 206 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 3:40 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 201 of 337 (664440)
06-01-2012 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by subbie
06-01-2012 12:56 AM


Re: Wow
Thank you but I know what photosynthesis is. I was trying to prove a point that common chemical reactions today were not always common. if you would have read prior posts than you would know that someone told me life began from common normal chemical reaction.
However you did understand my point when you said, "we don't know what the conditions on earth were before life." since we don't know what things were like we can only speculate, and when someone tells me the only method for life to begin is thru common normal chemical reactions i have to disagree furthermore i would like to point out that they don't know exactly what a common normal reaction was 4 billion years ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 12:56 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 1:50 AM swensenpower has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 202 of 337 (664441)
06-01-2012 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by swensenpower
06-01-2012 1:35 AM


Re: Wow
Thank you but I know what photosynthesis is. I was trying to prove a point that common chemical reactions today were not always common
But all you did was demonstrate your utter ignorance of the subject. Now, if you were trying to prove that you don't know much about conditions on Earth billions of years ago, your statement would have marvelous evidence to support your contention. However, proving that others don't know much about pre-biotic conditions by invoking a process that by definition requires life is not only unless in supporting your contention, but it actually undermines anything else you might say about the topic.
However you did understand my point when you said, "we don't know what the conditions on earth were before life."
I didn't say we don't know what conditions on the Earth were before life, you did. I'm perfectly aware that there is a great deal that we know about conditions on the Earth before life. You are the one wallowing in that particular vat of ignorance.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 1:35 AM swensenpower has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 2:09 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 203 of 337 (664442)
06-01-2012 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by subbie
06-01-2012 1:17 AM


Man i need some support here. Am I the only believer? it seems that way. I don't have time to reply to every one unless i spend more time than I plan to in this forum. Please don't believe that you out witted or stumped me if i don't reply even if it is the case. I want you to believe I just didn't have time to get to it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 1:17 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by Panda, posted 06-01-2012 5:08 AM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 217 by jar, posted 06-01-2012 8:47 AM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 220 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2012 9:55 AM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 222 by Jazzns, posted 06-01-2012 2:26 PM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 225 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-06-2012 6:11 PM swensenpower has not replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 204 of 337 (664443)
06-01-2012 2:09 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by subbie
06-01-2012 1:50 AM


Re: Wow
How do you know what it was like. were you there?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 1:50 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Coragyps, posted 06-01-2012 9:11 AM swensenpower has not replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 205 of 337 (664444)
06-01-2012 3:08 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by Minnemooseus
06-01-2012 12:33 AM


Re: The origins of free Oxygen
Thank you this is good information. This supports the early earth atmosphere model that i was talking about. stating that oxygen did not enter the atmosphere until bacteria released O2 as waist. but how do we know there was no O2 in the air before that? I was taught that there wasn't in school, but how can we know?
I was taught that mars was formed similarly to earth. before mars cooled down the magma flowed beneath its crust this motion around a solid core created electromagnetism that protected its atmosphere from being blown into space by solar radiation. I can see that the surface of mars is oxidized meaning to me that its atmosphere must of had oxygen in it. if earth and mars were created similarly and mars had oxygen in its atmosphere then earth should have had it as well. If this is so, why do some scientists teach that oxygen originated into the atmosphere by organisms? and again how do they know it?
here is an interesting tangent i just though of. If the way oxygen entered earths atmosphere was thru photosynthetic organisms, maybe the same happened on mars

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-01-2012 12:33 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Coragyps, posted 06-01-2012 9:09 AM swensenpower has not replied

  
swensenpower
Junior Member (Idle past 4316 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 05-31-2012


Message 206 of 337 (664448)
06-01-2012 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by subbie
06-01-2012 1:17 AM


This question seems like it is supposed to lead me to a certain kind of response but i never said that i disagreed with what is being taught.
I didn't actually mean that abiogenesis should not be taught. i merely wanted show that, ID is not being taught in schools because of lack of scientific evidence. and that if we applied that same judgement on abiogenesis than it would not be taught either.
and dude why are you so mean? please stop with the name calling and IQ judgments. you can write a post without it. Maybe just infer it i might not even catch on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by subbie, posted 06-01-2012 1:17 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by RAZD, posted 06-01-2012 8:28 AM swensenpower has not replied
 Message 223 by Taq, posted 06-01-2012 4:15 PM swensenpower has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 207 of 337 (664450)
06-01-2012 4:47 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by swensenpower
05-31-2012 10:06 PM


I have, and it is was, short however the text did provide ideas on what the atmosphere was like, what may have been the first cell wall, and what could have been a template for the first rna.
Well, this sort of thing has a connection with things we can actually observe. There is, for example, evidence for what the early atmosphere was like. When there are similar observations in favor of the creationists' magic poofing hypothesis for the origin of life, we can put that in textbooks too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by swensenpower, posted 05-31-2012 10:06 PM swensenpower has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 208 of 337 (664451)
06-01-2012 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by swensenpower
06-01-2012 2:06 AM


swensenpower writes:
I don't have time to reply to every one unless i spend more time than I plan to in this forum
There is no rush.
This is not like a chat room - there is no penalty for taking a day or a week to reply.
The main thing that will attract criticism is poorly thought-out responses.
So - take your time.
A single good post is worth a dozen one-liners.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

CRYSTALS!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 2:06 AM swensenpower has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 209 of 337 (664459)
06-01-2012 7:12 AM


How about easing up on the new guy with the current dog piling? Maybe a welcome to EvC would be nice. Seven of you guys against the new guy with 12 posts? No welcome? Just one big dog pile? Come on.

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2012 8:39 AM Chuck77 has not replied
 Message 221 by Theodoric, posted 06-01-2012 1:11 PM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 210 of 337 (664460)
06-01-2012 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 182 by swensenpower
05-31-2012 9:35 AM


Welcome
Hi swensenpower. Welcome to EvC. Nice to have you here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by swensenpower, posted 05-31-2012 9:35 AM swensenpower has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by swensenpower, posted 06-01-2012 7:49 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024