Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,352 Year: 3,609/9,624 Month: 480/974 Week: 93/276 Day: 21/23 Hour: 1/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the lowest multiplication rate for Humans ?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22473
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 42 of 144 (702360)
07-04-2013 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by goldenlightArchangel
07-04-2013 5:10 PM


Re: The Standard Response Frequently Posted
CrazyDiamond7 writes:
If the evolution theory is not fundamentally based on a specific conception of abiogenesis...
Evolution is a theory about how species come about, not how life came about. It is consistent with multiple "conceptions of abiogenesis." It doesn't matter if life on Earth was seeded from outer space or arose here from scratch or was created by God or Zeus.
Darwin's book was titled Origin of Species, not Origin of Life.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 07-04-2013 5:10 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 07-15-2013 4:55 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22473
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 47 of 144 (703163)
07-16-2013 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by goldenlightArchangel
07-15-2013 4:55 PM


Re: The Standard Response Frequently Posted
Hi CrazyDiamond7,
Just to let you know, in these anonymous quotes you keep issuing, I assume you're quoting yourself.
CrazyDiamond7 writes:
But a theory of the Evolutionists, Abiogenesis, is fundamentally based on the belief that it would have been possible.
Yes, whenever there is evidence for something then science does believe its origin must have been possible, and further, that its origin must have been natural. Observing an asteroid traveling through space, science believes its origin possible and natural. Observing life on Earth, science believes its origin possible and natural.
The origin-of-life as the Evolutionists see it is not a teaching based on perception of the reality since the results were not demonstrated.
Science does not assert more for the origin of life than the evidence allows. Everything that has ever happened in the history of the universe for which we have evidence has happened naturally, and so science believes that the origin of life occurred naturally. Other than that science has only hypotheses about abiogenesis and no firm theories.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 07-15-2013 4:55 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 07-23-2013 5:12 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22473
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 49 of 144 (703528)
07-24-2013 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by goldenlightArchangel
07-23-2013 5:12 PM


Re: Life in movement does not always happens naturally
CrazyDiamond7 writes:
It might take some time for one to bring up a sign ( or perhaps an evidence ) that 'the origin of life ( or the movement in which life is generated ) does not occur naturally
since 'All things are possible to him that investigate .. .. some new possibilities ..'
You've got it backwards. The idea of the supernatural is as old as mankind. There's been plenty of time to uncover supernatural evidence, none has surfaced. Studying the natural world using the scientific method is the new possibility.
All you're doing here is taking the long way of saying, "I have no evidence."
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Fix typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 07-23-2013 5:12 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 12-15-2014 7:03 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22473
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 59 of 144 (744817)
12-16-2014 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by goldenlightArchangel
12-15-2014 7:03 PM


Re: Emanation of Life Energy is what best explains. - Creationism leads to Crazyness
CrazyDiamond7 writes:
Percy, the light emanates of itself, so the life energy emanates of itself. The visible light was not created. Life was not created.
There are two problems with this. First, I'm not sure what it even means. Second, you still have no evidence.
Every person is a different reality, every person is a Primary life energy that is living not in a fragmentary way, Human life is emanating an independent realm, an alternate reality, because the light, or life energy in electrical form does not depend from being created. The light rises and appears in our Human form, otherwise the Light returns to the source.
This has the same two problems: it's unclear what it means, and you describe no evidence. For example, what evidence led you to conclude that there's such a thing as "life energy"? How did you discover that every person is "Primary life energy"? Why could it not have been "Secondary life energy" or something else altogether (like normal matter, which is what the evidence tells us)?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 12-15-2014 7:03 PM goldenlightArchangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 12-20-2014 12:35 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22473
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 63 of 144 (745219)
12-20-2014 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by goldenlightArchangel
12-20-2014 12:35 AM


Re: Emanation of Life Energy is what best explains. - Creationism leads to Crazyness
CrazyDiamond7 writes:
The term Primary Energy implies that the energy is a extension from one Primary source,
You're adding yet more elaboration but still providing no evidence. What is the evidence for this primary source of energy? What instruments did you use to detect this energy? What are the qualities of this energy?
Primary is an entire sequence, an extension from one root, or a Primary genealogical tree: the energy of life in every person is an extension of the same energy of life through which that person was generated.
What is the evidence for an "energy of life"? What is the evidence that connects the "energy of life" to the "primary energy"?
If you want your claims taken seriously, you'll need evidence.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by goldenlightArchangel, posted 12-20-2014 12:35 AM goldenlightArchangel 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