Search results

Interesting. According to Dawkins the chance God exists is same as that of the Tooth Fairy.

One side is not invoking a miracle. Often the side that is will falsely assert both sides are.

You are angry at an atheist why... because he won't acknowledge your imaginary friend?

I doubt you could introduce yourself at a party . What you introduce is a version of -take a scientist out of context sound bite pseudoscience - trying to make space for a sky wizard. Doesn't wash, no matter how many times you repeat the same old tired horseshite.

So what exactly is your problem here? You have closed membranes of amphiphilic compounds without proteins, within which proteins can form from inorganic 'non-life' material and replicate. Amphiphiles then evolve and benefit from proteins. Generally speaking, it does sound as if you...

Rew, why are you asking me to show you a laboratory experiment that would implausibly create proteins, which would not simulate the conditions on an early earth? There were no proteins on early earth. They formed later and the process is well understood. Modern cells evolved complex chemical...

Penny dropped at last. You quoted me verbatim as much as I quoted you verbatim when I said you admitted to being an atheist. But hey, you're getting there. You've started linking to places where there is at least more of the whole picture other than the usual -religiously skewed quote mined...

You may as well have stopped at those first and second sentences. Of course there is scientific explanation of how proteins form. Even in school books. Nothing to do with miracles. So why say that? The only ones basing claims to do with proof and abiogenesis here are those who will ignore...

Oh dear me come on Jem wake up for christsakes. Here..a big fat clue for you. still waiting for you to show where I said there was proof of life from non life.

Name calling all the time won't make you right. You have been presenting your own twisted version of science, more commonly known as pseudo science. You've also brought up the same old dead beat cut and paste articles from people who should know better, and whose arguments fall over at their...

That's may seem correct only if you entirely ignore all the proven science associated with the question, and then consider magic more likely than natural processes.

Then you are not in the realm of science.

You are very slow. Try it again. If you still can't work it out, I'll elaborate one step at a time. Pinch me someone. Did Jem really state "we" say life from inorganic matter is feasible! omg. 'Life from non-life' as you concede, feasible it is then , though not through those natural...

Trying to argue that life from inorganic matter is not feasible, is like trying to say falling by gravity can't happen.

Ah yes the "proof that life came from non life". That would be in the same thread there were so many quotes you decided to lie about being an atheist.

Good points, only I would take issue with this "One must bear in mind that the combining of chemical elements is not haphazard, but rather highly organized and specific, so that the laws of Chemistry and Physics are obeyed. Recognition of this takes us full circle back to the Quote...

"Right off the bat wrong. First sentence. No need to go further." Spot on. Rational argument matters not one jot to Jem. He needs gaps for a God to sit in, as if life could have originated not by chance from chemical reaction/synthesis which of course everything points toward, but by...

Yes the tablets. Keep taking them. You must have no idea how incoherent that is. If you get someone who doesn't need meds to read and explain the article, they'll be able to tell you Szostak remarks it might never be known what really happened on early Earth because if so many plausible...