Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   IMPOSSIBLE logic for evolutionists (from a smart creation scientist)
John
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 50 (37575)
04-22-2003 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by booboocruise
04-22-2003 12:14 PM


Re: Where are you taking me with this...
quote:
You do not know that oxygen wasnt present in the atmosphere billions of years ago
There are good reasons to believe that it was not present in abundance.
1) The early earth was extremely volcanic. Volcanic gases are mostly water and carbon dioxide-- yes, both contain oxygen but not free oxygen.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.earth.northwestern.edu/people/seth/202/lectures/Atmosphere/atmhistory.htm
2) There are minerals in Archean sediments that form only in non-oxidizing environments.
Archean - Find occurrence of minerals that only form in non-oxidizing environments in Archean sediments: Pyrite (Fools gold; FeS2), Uraninite (UO2). These minerals are easily dissolved out of rocks under present atmospheric conditions.
The atmosphere - origin and structure
3) There is evidence of the increase in atmospheric oxygen over time. See the cited source above for details.
quote:
First off, if you have oxygen added to the experiment, it will oxydize (decay, rot, rust, etc.)
Decay and rot occur perfectly well in the absence of oxygen. It is called anearobic decay.
quote:
But wait, the Miller experiment DID included ammonia (a by-product of life, and crucial in their making of amino acids)
Ammonia can be produced by iron reduction of nitrate. It doesn't have to be organic in origen.
quote:
But if exclude oxygen from the atmosphere, you get no ozone, and without ozone you have no ammonia.
??? What? Ozone actually destroys ammonia.
quote:
You see, Miller cheated
I'm not sure what evidence Miller had at his disposal, but if he guessed, he guessed well. At any rate, it isn't nice to say he cheated. It was an experiment. It added information to our understanding of organic/pre-organic chemistry. It could have just as well as gone the other way.
quote:
Also, Miller produced 2% ammino acids (some more, some less, but generally around 2%). The other 98% of his product was tar and other TOXIC chemicals that would harm a living organism.
Miller produced 2% amino acids, but 10-15% organic molecules. hmm... the methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), environment would harm most modern living organisms. We are not dealing with modern living organisms here. We aren't yet dealing with living organism either-- just organic precursors.
quote:
Also, since you don't trust me (and that's my fault, sorry) here are my sources:
We don't trust your sources either, for reasons that have been explained seems like a hundred times.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by booboocruise, posted 04-22-2003 12:14 PM booboocruise 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