Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.

[stu]

Quote from jem:

amino acids, organic matter, building blocks, miller urey, natural processes.... but...

you can not get around the fact you have no science showing life from non life...

Those building blocks of life.... are not for.... "not life". What do you expect they are going to synthesize into? Jesus dolls?

And you should really stop brainlessly repeating the same old philosophy cut and paste.
Just because it's from mit does not make you look any less idiotic than you are being.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

You're suggesting non living matter has all the building blocks of life.
Ok.

Well that and that there is apparently more to life than just the chemical "building blocks".

 

[futuresbuyer3]

Quote from jem:

it was your quote stu... we are waiting for the evidence of life from non life..

What do you want? Video footage? A petri dish reenactment?

And how does your "non-life to life" theory work? One day it just happened?

The so called "random chance" argument is a whole lot more believable than "one day it just happened because the man in the sky spoke it into existence" argument.

 

[jem]

Quote from stu:

Those building blocks of life.... are not for.... "not life". What do you expect they are going to synthesize into? Jesus dolls?

And you should really stop brainlessly repeating the same old philosophy cut and paste.
Just because it's from mit does not make you look any less idiotic than you are being.

This reminds me of the dyslexic atheist who disbelieves dog. You really do not even understand what you are arguing against.

You just can't assume that because you have the building blocks of life... they evolved into life on earth all by themselves.... that is what all the research is about.

 

[jem]

Quote from futuresbuyer3:

What do you want? Video footage? A petri dish reenactment?

And how does your "non-life to life" theory work? One day it just happened?

The so called "random chance" argument is a whole lot more believable than "one day it just happened because the man in the sky spoke it into existence" argument.

that is a different argument, but probably also wrong...

did you read the paper from MIT I posted a page or two back.

I am not being the scientist here...
I am telling you what they are saying..

some say random chance - but the paper says most say not likely.
some say directed evolution
some say pan spermia
some say don't know at the moment

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

Well that and that there is apparently more to life than just the chemical "building blocks".

There certainly is more to life , but what has that to do with scientific proof those chemical building blocks for life arise from inorganic - non living matter?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

There certainly is more to life , but what has that to do with scientific proof those chemical building blocks for life arise from inorganic - non living matter?

I know what you mean stewie, we had rock in the front yard that suddenly and quiet by random chance turned into a live goat.
It was amazing to say the least.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

You just can't assume that because you have the building blocks of life... they evolved into life on earth all by themselves.... that is what all the research is about.

Of course I can! THAT is what all the research is about.
With the weight of scientific evidence all pointing in that direction and no other proper explanation at all, any reasonable person can assume that.

If you can't assume "the building blocks of life... they evolved into life on earth all by themselves" ...especially when it's proved they can occur from non living matter all on their own , wtf do you think they did?

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

I know what you mean stewie, we had rock in the front yard that suddenly and quiet by random chance turned into a live goat.
It was amazing to say the least.

That's it crummie, I know you can be as dumb as a rock by random chance postings too.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

that is a different argument, but probably also wrong...

did you read the paper from MIT I posted a page or two back.

I am not being the scientist here...
I am telling you what they are saying..

All you are actually doing is brainlessly repeating what a philosopher is saying the scientists are saying.