Origin: Probability of a Single Protein Forming by Chance (Page 2): Of course you didn't. So let science do what science does. And I don't care if you believe in the Easter Bunny. But...

jcboy3

Racmanaz wrote:

Well, you are quite illiterate aren’t you? I never said that the creator could be proven through science. I’ve said that on many occasions. And I don’t say that a creator exist I said, I believe the creator exist. But here you are believing in some mumble jumble Abiogenesis that has never been proven no evidence of it, and has never been observed.

Of course you didn't. So let science do what science does. And I don't care if you believe in the Easter Bunny. But science does not need to consider any creationist mumbo-jumbo, either. Just proceed with finding the physical answer.

As for your insults...

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

jcboy3 wrote:

Of course you didn't. So let science do what science does. And I don't care if you believe in the Easter Bunny. But science does not need to consider any creationist mumbo-jumbo, either. Just proceed with finding the physical answer.

As for your insults...

lol You are demonstrating signs of losing an argument. Like I said, science could not prove or disprove of a non-physical creator, and I don’t make that claim. My claim is that I believe in a God, or a creator by faith. You, however, believe in some sort of process through abiogenesis that life spontaneously developed from a non-life source. Yet there is no evidence that has ever happened and there is no evidence that it’s occurring now yet you believe in that mumbo-jumbo without any evidence.

jcboy3

Racmanaz wrote:

lol You are demonstrating signs of losing an argument. Like I said, science could not prove or disprove of a non-physical creator, and I don’t make that claim. My claim is that I believe in a God, or a creator by faith. You, however, believe in some sort of process through abiogenesis that life spontaneously developed from a non-life source. Yet there is no evidence that has ever happened and there is no evidence that it’s occurring now yet you believe in that mumbo-jumbo without any evidence.

Wrong. There is current evidence of mutation and evolution. There is no evidence of a supernatural creator.

Life is merely self-replication. There is lots of evidence of self-replication. So the details of getting to a stable self-replication consistent with current life forms has not been discovered. But no one says the science is done. Just that it's more logical to pursue what is known, than to pursue what come crackpots believe.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

Racmanaz wrote:

Well, you are quite illiterate aren’t you? I never said that the creator could be proven through science. I’ve said that on many occasions. And I don’t say that a creator exist I said, I believe the creator exist. But here you are believing in some mumble jumble Abiogenesis that has never been proven no evidence of it, and has never been observed.

"Well, you are quite illiterate, aren’t you? I never said that."

Just for giggles why don't you go back and count how many

times you began a post with those exact words?

Maybe you are the problem.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

jcboy3 wrote:

Wrong. There is current evidence of mutation and evolution. There is no evidence of a supernatural creator.

Life is merely self-replication. There is lots of evidence of self-replication. So the details of getting to a stable self-replication consistent with current life forms has not been discovered. But no one says the science is done. Just that it's more logical to pursue what is known, than to pursue what come crackpots believe.

See you are deflecting once again and answering a question I did not even ask or was even taking about. The Abiogenesis hypothesis you believe in has ZERO evidence and absolutely NO observational evidence whatsoever. You believe in something that has ZERO scientific observable evidence. You believe in fairy tales.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Kraken wrote:

"Well, you are quite illiterate, aren’t you? I never said that."

Just for giggles why don't you go back and count how many

times you began a post with those exact words?

Maybe you are the problem.

Do me a favor and go spend the time and count them for me.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Racmanaz wrote:

Do me a favor and go spend the time and count them for me.

Iol. It's easier and more entertaining to use the ... UHH search engine. Ex: type in say, evoloution scammers or abortion or intellegent design or Ray Epps or Fetterman ... etc. Rac's humbug comes up everytime. The archive is deep and wide. It's his own fault.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

pendennis wrote:

It's likely that life got its start numerous times... (show quote)

The probability of so many conditions being just right for “life” to spontaneously happen is infinitesimally low.

But that is the beauty of understanding the true vastness of infinity. If time and the universe are infinite, then the probability of ANYTHING happening, no matter how small that probability, is 100%.

Thus, the possibility that there might be a god who created the universe is just as likely as the possibility that there is no god and the universe just “happened.”

Infinity… an incomprehensibly beautiful concept… that transcends all human understanding.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

JohnFrim wrote:

The probability of so many conditions being just r... (show quote)

The problem is that the infinitesimally low probability of life originating from non-life is just one part of the equation. There are many “infinitesimally low” probabilities that must occur and be sustained even before the infinitesimally low probability of life originating from non-life to have occurred. The cosmological constant is one of many that comes to mind that is relatively impossible to happen without a creative mind. And we’re not even touching the issue of the probability of consciousness.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

ONLY 100 Billion galaxies at the newest best estimate... Our little inflated hatbands think we are better than sliced bread... What was that novel where the BIG screen showed little red dots blinking out as self aware species " did not make it " and new little red dots of emerging species in the universe.... Science is just a feeble attempt to explain and understand within the framework of our physical laws such as physics, chemistry etc... the works of something we really have no comprehension of.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Racmanaz wrote:

The problem is that the infinitesimally low probab... (show quote)

Your comment shows you have not grasped the true meaning of infinity.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

JohnFrim wrote:

Your comment shows you have not grasped the true meaning of infinity.

Wrong, I know exactly what it means and my comment stands strong. You lose again.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

Racmanaz wrote:

Wrong, I know exactly what it means and my comment stands strong. You lose again.

Some day you will have to show us all your trophies for all your wins.

Or are they just participating in trophies?

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Kraken wrote:

Some day you will have to show us all your trophies for all your wins.

Or are they just participating in trophies?

Participating trophies are all reserved for lefty liberals like you.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Racmanaz wrote:

Wrong, I know exactly what it means and my comment stands strong. You lose again.

No Rac, you lose. Infinity means that ANYTHING that CAN possibly happen WILL happen... 100%.

Heck, that means that you might actually agree with me on this issue!