15 PHD level scientists say evolution is a bunch of bullshit

@Setanta,

Ah hah, so you believe in a theory that does not care about the rational source of the theory.

Thus you do not care about logical science.

Done over and completed.

Bye.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

High school level or triple PHD, there is not one example of proven prebiotic molecules known to exist. Gunpowder is a pre destruction substance, as it's release of energy always causes some destruction, which can also be positive. This can be demonstrated by the experiment that you can not do for prebiotics.

It's there. I brought it to the table. Denialism is your Achilles heel. Now you show something. Anything. Any tiny scrap of empirical support for your god hypothesis. Anything?

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

This is such utter BS it's hard to know where to start. People have constantly provided you evidence, and you just ignore it. You're not here to do anything other than to bleat about your Big Magic Sky Daddy, and for that you have provided no evidence. I guarantee you that nobody here gives a rat's ass what you believe, but they will be more than happy to provide evidence of just how full of sh*t you are. That has happened regularly. That you stick your head in the sand and ignore the evidence that others provide does not mean that there has been no evidence provided. You are one of the more ignorant of the god botherers we've had here, and believe me, we've has dozens of them show up in the more than a decade that this has been discussed here.

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Yes, we are evidently some sorts of 'machine' but the comparisson is probably misleading in the sense that no know machine can repair itself, think about itself, or fabricate other similar machines...

0 Replies

@Setanta,

That level of denialism concerns me. It's at the level where parents refuse to take their kids to the doctor and try to pray them well instead. Y'know, until they're dead. That level of denialism. It scares me that people like that can legally reproduce, much less be in charge of a child's physical welfare and education.

Edit:

That said, I think he's a Poe.

3 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Your reasoning abilities are for ****. Evolution doesn't care about the origins of life, because there is no evolution until there is life. You are an idiot. If it weren't for straw man fallacies, you'd have nothing at all to say. That would be a good thing.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Yeah, the world is full of people who have no business caring for children.

0 Replies

@FBM,

Unlike Qahog and Herald and co, DNA is not actually denying evolution. As for the origins of life, it's not an issue where we can say in confidence we know what happened. There is no overwhelming scientific concensus on the issue, supported by thousands of evidence, like is the case with evolution. So I wouldn't call him a denier.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

...DNA is not actually denying evolution...

Well, it wouldn't, would it? Not sure what you're saying there.

Quote:

As for the origins of life, it's not an issue where we can say in confidence we know what happened. There is no overwhelming scientific concensus on the issue, supported by thousands of evidence, like is the case with evolution. So I wouldn't call him a denier.

Edited. Wrong thread.

Edit edit: His claim is that there is no evidence for prebiotics and there clearly is, as I and farmerman have both explicitly shown. That's his (what's-his-name, not farmerman) denialism.

1 Reply

@FBM,

I meant the POSTER called 'DNA thumb drive'. Sorry for the confusion.

What he means is that you cannot really call them "pre-biotic" molecules until you prove they can lead to "post-biotics", ie to life. That's a rather lame argument, i agree, but it's not about denying evidence.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I meant the POSTER called 'DNA thumb drive'. Sorry for the confusion.

What he means is that you cannot really call them "pre-biotic" molecules until you prove they can lead to "post-biotics", ie to life. That's a rather lame argument, i agree, but it's not about denying evidence.

Oh! OK, gotcha. Yeah, he's not denying evolution itself. He's taking the pope's line there. But his denial of prebiotic molecules is an effort to do a god-of-the-gaps argument. As far as denying the prebiotic molecules' relationships to post-biotic molecules, that's like saying hydrogen and oxygen are unrelated to water. He's trying to deny hydrogen and oxygen (by analogy), but saying that water is OK. Meaning, of course, that his Bronze Age god stepped in there somewhere to wave its magic wand.

0 Replies

It's not just about pre-biotics that DNATD displays his denials. He ignores or denies any evidence of anything which is presented to him. For example, he continues to assert that DNA is needed for replication, despite people pointing out to him again and again that that is not the case. More than 40 years ago, i read a précis in The Scientific American showing that organic molecules will form and replicate themselves in clay tubules. It is observed in nature, and can be shown to occur in the lab. You have the replication of organic molecules before self-replicating life forms even arise. Yet DNATD continues to babble about no pre-biotics. Sufficiently viscous glycerol naturally forms spheres in water--you've got "cells" before life exists. These are natural chemical reactions which occur were no life has arisen. DNATD is appallingly ignorant, and it's a shame that so many intelligent people here fall for his straw man fallacies, and attempt to argue his drivel.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

... DNATD is appallingly ignorant, and it's a shame that so many intelligent people here fall for his straw man fallacies, and attempt to argue his drivel.

Yup. This is what drives me to suspect that he's gone Poe.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Don't "dude me" unless you know me.

Quote:

Dude, DNA has 3 billion lines of code that enable you to contemplate and write code in the first place.

You have no idea, do you. Go look up how many of those SNPs are there with an extant function nd which are either "fossil" or dupes. You haven't considered somatic DNA/RNA and epigenetic DNA/RNA

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

We are actually much closer to really understanding the "warm pond " and prebiotic polymers than we are in some mythical guy in the sky.
We gain evidence everyday for the former and your ilk loses credibility each day for the latter

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Kick dat ass. (I almost ended that with "dood," but thought better of it.)

0 Replies

You guys are shooting too low. My 2 cents anyway.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Quote:

there is not one example of proven prebiotic molecules known to exist

Youre painting yourself into corner with this silly logic. If we go with a uniformitarian naturalism, we repeat that
"The present is key to the past"
Why can we not further observe "prebiotic chemicals" from looking at the life forms that show us "post biotic chemicals "?

You seem to hang your logic on just one outcome.

why isn't the glyoxalate cycle and pyrimidines from living cells the same as it was at the point when life arose?

You seem to be a fan of Theistic Evolution but sometimes you jump off the rod of common sense ( necessary item to nTURALISTIC or Theistic evolution).
Id suggest (gain) that you run FREE subscription to the

Cold Springs Harbor
Perspectives in Biology

theres a series on molecular evolution that may chnge your outlook(if youre not just a shill for IDers)

0 Replies

@Setanta,

glycerol needs a fatty acid and a reaction with alkali (hence the clay), so having it occur naturally by something like the Tropsch process is almost a replicating cell-wall gimme for abiogenesis. Thumby just skims the surface and arrives at his conclusions.

I wasn't babbling , I was reciting how, by using "post biotic chemicals" alive today, we can intuit the functions and structures of these prebiotic chemicals e loosely refer to.
Thumby's gonna stick with theistic evolution in an undefined time regime, I suppose.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

I want for those who do not believe as I do, to present me with the answers as to why I am wrong.

Why would anybody care about what you believe? I certainly don't. As for convincing you you're wrong, we've been there before with quahog. He decided what he deemed as evidence, and even though he was presented with a ton of it, none was ever good enough. I suspect you're the same, the fact you refuse to see "warm pond" as a metaphor and insist on taking it literally says as much.

2 Replies

15 PHD level scientists say evolution is a bunch of bullshit

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know