Comparing Atheism and Christianity (veil, genesis, church, quote)

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

Reality-check...

https://youtu.be/r4sP1E1Jd_Y

Can you stick to the point the person you quoted was making. He was not saying that abiogenesis was solved.

[Harry Diogenes]

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

Reality-check...

https://youtu.be/r4sP1E1Jd_Y

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis#Sources

Reality-checks (plural). Many of them. Almost all science papers, none of them Youtube videos from creationists. For anyone really interested in looking at both sides of the argument.

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

Reality-check...

https://youtu.be/r4sP1E1Jd_Y

Let's check your reality:

Please explain how life got started. Remember, God dun it is not an explanation - we want the same standards you expect of us - how did God do it? And do not say he used his power or spoke a magic incantation or any non explanatory BS like that. How did he use his power to do it, what does it look like, how did it come together, etc.

Ready set go!

[Iwasmadenew]

Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis#Sources

Reality-checks (plural). Many of them. Almost all science papers, none of them Youtube videos from creationists. For anyone really interested in looking at both sides of the argument.

I noticed that you addressed none of the points in the video.

What is your confidence level in abiogenesis? (0-100)

Marc doesn’t believe it. It’s an extraordinary claim without extraordinary evidence.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

I noticed that you addressed none of the points in the video.

What is your confidence level in abiogenesis? (0-100)

Marc doesn’t believe it. It’s an extraordinary claim without extraordinary evidence.

Turning the question back to you...what's your confidence level on Goddunit and what is the evidence that you provide? Can you present it without resorting to some UTube video? You know, like in your own words.
You ask questions but answer few (if any)
Or will you just disappear for a while (again) hoping we'll forget you never answered?

[Harry Diogenes]

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

What is your confidence level in abiogenesis? (0-100)

As your god is most improbable (point 6), then abiogenesis must be most probable unless you can provide a third option. So around 100% until new evidence is provided.

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

Marc doesn’t believe it.

Irrelevant, and I believe also a straw man.

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

It’s an extraordinary claim without extraordinary evidence.

No, that is your god. Abiogenesis is an ordinary claim with ordinary evidence (it is called chemistry). I did provide people interested in looking at both sides with a list.

If they wish to discuss abiogenesis, there is a science forum for this.

[Harry Diogenes]

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

I noticed that you addressed none of the points in the video.

I notice you always rely on Youtube videos and never valid science papers.

If you go down an alley and get robbed every time, you find it a waste of time to go down that alley again. It is the same with creationist sites, papers any Youtube channels. But if you want to discuss the video, post it in the science section and I will waste my time, sorry, I will tomorrow watch your video (for free*) and comment on it there (unless it is pulled for being pseudo science).

If creationism was in any way valid, it would be mainstream science. After 2,500 years, creationism has still failed to provide even one answer. This should tell you something.

*My rates usually range from 30 to 200 Euros pro Stunde depending on the type of work.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

What is your confidence level in abiogenesis? (0-100)

There's no such thing "abiogenesis."

That's sophistry at it's finest.

You have used the Persuasive Definition Fallacy to introduce a Red Herring (another fallacy).

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew

Do you believe life originated on Earth, by chance, out of inorganic material?

According to your reasoning, you should default to disbelief about this, since there is no extraordinary evidence to demonstrate such a claim.

You have just demonstrated a total lack of scientific understanding.

Inorganic material is any material other than Hydro-Carbon chains.

DNA and all life on Earth has always been Hydro-Carbon-based.

The difference between organic and inorganic is something that was explained to you in the 7th Grade, and then again in high school chemistry class in the 9th or 10th Grade, or biology or life science or earth science classes.

We can infer from your comments that your level of scientific understanding is less than 7th Grade Level.

Your claim is erroneous, baseless and without merit.

Life originated from organic material, not inorganic material.

For the record, I'm certain Life began in Space. The Universe is teeming with Life.

All you need for Life to begin is Hydrogen, Carbon, Oxygen, Nitrogen and Phosphorus, plus any star no matter how distant and/or radioactive isotopes.

As science proved just a few weeks ago, asteroids, comets and planetoids have the "seeds of Life" on them.

At the risk of talking way over your head, it is the stars and/or radioactive isotopes that cause the Photo-Electric Effect and/or Pair-Production with those organic materials.

Where is Iwas?

[Iwasmadenew]

Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes

As your god is most improbable (point 6), then abiogenesis must be most probable unless you can provide a third option. So around 100% until new evidence is provided.

Irrelevant, and I believe also a straw man.

No, that is your god. Abiogenesis is an ordinary claim with ordinary evidence (it is called chemistry). I did provide people interested in looking at both sides with a list.

If they wish to discuss abiogenesis, there is a science forum for this.

Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
What is your confidence level in abiogenesis? (0-100)

Harry: "abiogenesis must be most probable unless you can provide a third option. So around 100% [confidence] until new evidence is provided"
"Abiogenesis is an ordinary claim with ordinary evidence (it is called chemistry)."

You're just demonstrating your ignorance. There is no evidence. It's just a theory.

People who know more about it than you...

Denis Noble (Oxford and Royal Society biologist): “The biggest questions in science today are about how life got going and the origin of the genetic code. How do living things ‘know’ how to evolve? What do cells know that we don’t? Is the genetic code the result of chance as some claim for 100 years – or is science pointing us to currently unknown processes? The answers will be as profound as Einstein’s E=mc2.”

George Church (Harvard geneticist): “Origin of life is the hardest question in science. It’s mind-boggling you can have such complex structures that make copies of themselves. But it’s very hard to do that with machines we’ve built. We are engineers but we’re rather poor ones compared to the pseudo engineering that is biological evolution.”