IMPOSSIBLE logic for evolutionists (from a smart creation scientist)

Enough lurking. I decided to register and introduce myself by answering this post, though I have seen enough from booboocruise to expect no substantial reply.Ammonia is a "by-product of life"? Now this is an interesting claim.
Try Oops, something lost
Actually, it seems that ammonia (NH3) is rapidly produced from nitrogen at deep-sea vents. It is not a "by-product" of life, nor does its formation require free oxygen. You could have prevented embarassing yourself by spending roughly 60 seconds on Google (as I did) to verify your claim. Or you could have started with a reliable source in the first place.It takes an intelligent mind to make life: This claim has been addressed numerous times on this forum alone. Gathering materials and providing the conditions believed to have existed in the past, and then watching to see what happens, tells us that organic compounds can spontaneously form from simpler substances. That is all it tells us. If we saw a supernatural being assemble those chemicals into a fully-formed creature, then we would have evidence for design. But we don't.Keep in mind that abiogenesis is not a vital component of the ToE, but only one possible explanation of how life began. The diversification which followed is a separate issue. Please stop confusing the two.Finally, a question: are you planning on answering any of the refutations to your initial posts? In many of these threads you started, I see you're beginning to plow ahead with additional (and equally bad) arguments, while ignoring the evidence presented. If your motives are honest then you might try to demonstrate that by debating in good faith, which requires more than lip service to those who step up to answer you.

quote:

---

I have never engaged anybody in a written debate, (not counting this forum).

---

Until you start dealing with the answers to your initial posting spree, you still haven't really engaged in written debate. You've employed the "fire-and-forget" tactic and then come back from another angle rather than dealing with those who respond.

quote:

---

So, every time I have ever argued/debated/discussed evolution and creation with others I was going on what I had available (books, notes, etc.) The opponents were either unprepaired or not very knowledgable in the field of evolution/creation.

---

Exactly what everyone here suspected. In case you hadn't noticed, this forum is populated by a lot of PhD types (among whose ranks I am not found) who are not as easily confused by a few stock phrases. If you want to debate, then at least figure out who you're dealing with first!

quote:

---

I am not trying to make a fool out of any evolutionists;

---

For your sake, that is probably a good thing. YEC is not about to make anybody look foolish except for some of its supporters. (personally, as a former YEC, I just feel used and deceived)

quote:

---

I just choose to believe in the Bible, and I look where I can to find evidence for AND against it. However, since the evidence surrounding creation and evolution are still being tossed back and forth as a heated, world-wide debate, I cannot seem to find the CONCRETE proof against the Bible--unless that included the countless proposals and theories against a young universe (the Oort Cloud, the geologic strata, the "reliability" of radiometric dating, and DNA similarities among animals, etc.)

---

I'm all in favor of the search for truth. Since you say you are as well, please read more of the "other side's" material with an open mind, and if nothing else, face the concerns of people on this forum about the debate you refer to! DEFEND YOUR POSITION or consider taking another!

quote:

---

Why would one of you being wrong mean that the other is right?

​

I don't mean to dump this on you specifically, this is just something I see whenever Creationists and Evolutionists meet up... each side seems convinced that if they prove the other one wrong, it somehow proves that their side is right.

​

...no it doesn't. It only proves that one side is wrong.

---

Indeed. Let us not discount theistic evolutionists' beliefs. It seems like a pretty basic understanding here that evolution only deals with what happened after life began. Abiogenesis is a related but separate issue.Still waiting for booboocruise to substantially acknowledge all the refutations of his manic string of posts that first day....