Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Atheism implies spontaneous generation. Thats not optional at all.
Dead matter can be defined as lifeless matter, non-living matter, it doesn't matter what we call it, we know what it means. Since we as well as all living creatures are made of matter itself, then calling it dead matter is actually appropriate in that sense. Ambiguous words brother.
Some atheist don't actually run from this, most do like you but its ungetoverable with the atheist position. Life either came from the supernatural or it came from non-living matter. What else exists between those two things??????
Life, made of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and other non-living atoms?
And life is just chemistry, and we know all these exist. We have no evidence for the supernatural.
This forum is to discuss Atheism and Agnosticism. Yes, we occasionally allow some science to creep into discussions. Just like you can read in the rules, the idea in allowing that was to permit correction in a few posts, or an occasional relevant comment. It's obvious now that this conversation is going nowhere. Pages and pages of posts have taken place with no relevance to the original topic. It's also obvious that no matter how much you try, some people simply won't pay any attention to what you say.
No further discussion of the science of evolution, spontaneous generation, or how life began. I've been watching the A&A forum for over a dozen years. None of that is relevant to discussions of Atheism and Agnosticism (the topics to discuss in this forum).
Evening Primrose, 1905. What you call 'macroevolution' observed. And there is plenty of evidence for evolution. Just Google the phrase 'evidence for evolution'.
Also Google 'Evening Primrose 1905', and check the 'science' behind any of the creationist links you find. You will find the creationists are lying.
Citation please. Because this sounds like something a creationist web site has taken out of context.
Talking of creationist web sites, if the science supports creationism, why do the creationist scientists lie in their papers?
So why do we as embryos develop gills and tails, and go through various stages before we take a human form? Why do we not develop into small people that grow during the gestation time? This is just a part of the evidence you say we do not have, and that your opinion can not answer.
And why are you ignoring my post where I gave you the answer to this, Manfred Eigen hypercycles?
Stop asserting false things, provide evidence. And in the science section.
Since we cannot discuss science stuff and since you made a false scientific claim which I want to correct you on, and since you don't take direct messages, will you follow me to the science section?
I guess we have gone as far as this forum will allow unfortunately, just a little more I need from you then we can go out separate ways
Have you read creationist 'science' papers? If so, and you are still a creationist, then you are either not educated enough to discuss evolution, or are being dishonest.
If Danny had done any research at all he would of known that Stephen Jay Gould was taken out of context and the entire claim by creationists was a deliberate lie.
Its not research if you just take claims against evolution without checking .I
I feel i can call creationists sites dishonest only because i have gone on them read them abd checked with the original scientific paper to see if they are correct, in error or outright lying. Often uts the latter.
And to Arch Angel creatiinism is not religion is a misuse of religion. Its not about believing in Genesis but in getting people to distrust science.
Since we cannot discuss science stuff and since you made a false scientific claim which I want to correct you on, and since you don't take direct messages, will you follow me to the science section?
I think we all will follow you there. Who wants to miss out on the fun?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
I guess we have gone as far as this forum will allow unfortunately, just a little more I need from you then we can go out separate ways
Tell me which coat is yours and I will get it for you.
Since we cannot discuss science stuff and since you made a false scientific claim which I want to correct you on, and since you don't take direct messages, will you follow me to the science section?
I guess we have gone as far as this forum will allow unfortunately, just a little more I need from you then we can go out separate ways
Don't see where you ever went to the Science forum.
Don't see where you ever went to the Science forum.
I havent gone yet, im very busy with work as it has picked up recently. I'm sorry for the delay. I figured people will look here so im responding back to let people know it i need just a little time then we can get to it. Priorities first.
We should takes bet on which post will be the last when the thread is closed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
