Attack on Evolutionism

[jdmj101]

And WHO CREATED GOD?

God doesn't have a creator because he doesn't have a beginning or an end. If he created time, why should he be bound by its boundaries?

 

[Shredderbeam]

But what caused the those elements, gasses, etc to combine exactly to form a cell, and most importantly, the DNA of a cell, the most complex element of a cell?

1). Quite literally, random chance. If you leave a sea of organic molecules to sit around for 100 million years, throw in some radioactivity, and a huge amount of lightening, you're going to get some pretty interesting molecules.

2). DNA is a replicator. If you have the replicator, you have the precursor to DNA.

 

[Your Sister]

1). Quite literally, random chance. If you leave a sea of organic molecules to sit around for 100 million years, throw in some radioactivity, and a huge amount of lightening, you're going to get some pretty interesting molecules.

2). DNA is a replicator. If you have the replicator, you have the precursor to DNA.

I'm still wondering how you can create something from nothing. You are meaning to tell me that these molecules/replicators spontaneously created themselves?

 

[Masterfaizy]

OP is just shooting questions at us, not trying to discuss. His strategy is to seek our confidence and see if we have any holes in our theories, which is hypocritical for him seeing as he himself believes in god.

Just had to point that out.

 

[jdmj101]

1). Quite literally, random chance. If you leave a sea of organic molecules to sit around for 100 million years, throw in some radioactivity, and a huge amount of lightening, you're going to get some pretty interesting molecules.

2). DNA is a replicator. If you have the replicator, you have the precursor to DNA.

They have been able to recreate this in the lab and it worked. The problem with this theory in real life is that the compounds would be too far apart to come in contact with each other to create organic compounds.

 

[The Fat Controller]

I'm still wondering how you can create something from nothing. You are meaning to tell me that these molecules/replicators spontaneously created themselves?

Essentially these molecules/replicators will have been created through chemical reactions going on in Earth's primordial oceans. There were plenty millions of years for this to happen.

 

[Shredderbeam]

I'm still wondering how you can create something from nothing. You are meaning to tell me that these molecules/replicators spontaneously created themselves?

They can't create themselves, obviously, since to create themselves they must first exist. I am proposing that they arose by nothing more than chance.

The problem with this theory in real life is that the compounds would be too far apart to come in contact with each other to create organic compounds.

Who stated that they would be too far apart?

 

[Masterfaizy]

They have been able to recreate this in the lab and it worked. The problem with this theory in real life is that the compounds would be too far apart to come in contact with each other to create organic compounds.

Yeah? Umm, the problem is that your religion makes no sense at all. At least we've been able to prove our theory.

 

[jdmj101]

Yeah? Umm, the problem is that your religion makes no sense at all. At least we've been able to prove our theory.

Prove that it would never happen in real life.

 

[Masterfaizy]

You mean prove it would happen in real life?
They did prove it in real life.

You cannot prove God exists.
Your argument is invalid.

 

[thequestionmark]

I did a little research and found a famous British mathematician named Sir Roger Penrose. He calculalated that the probability of the universe producing life was 1 in 10^10^123. In mathematics, anything with a chance of 10^50 is considered impossible. To look at that in another perspective, there are around 10^78 atoms in the entire universe. An astronomer named Fred Hoyle stated that the chance of DNA assembling from organic compounds is one in 10^40,000. Just some things to think about.

I don't even know where to start with this pile of bullshit. Any mathematician (ESPECIALLY ONE from the 1940's) who claims to have knowledge (not just SPECULATION) on the lurking variables involved with the possibility of this is FLAT OUT IGNORANT. Even considering one variable, given an infinite number of time, EVERYTHING that can happen, no matter how unlikely, will happen.

DNA (or the organic compounds) in the bare simplest forms has a much higher probability. A pool of organic materials forming the double helix human DNA on the other hand, is as you said, mathematically impossible. Congratulations, you have in fact proven that development ISN'T entirely random.

As for the OP, he is in fact correct. Scientist have yet to produce life in a "test tube". No, you aren't making something out of nothing, you are dropping the letters "esapkeshrea" on the ground until they form Shakespeare. The theory proves that creating life out of a non-living substance is indeed, very hard to replicate.

That is not attack on evolutionalism...the origin of life is dubious, but the process which occured after is not.

 

[wowhamba]

God doesn't have a creator because he doesn't have a beginning or an end. If he created time, why should he be bound by its boundaries?

Okay what if I said "The universe doesn't have a creator because it doesn't have a beginning or an end."

How could you prove me wrong? My theory is just as valid as yours.
You have no proof that god created time etc.

 

[XeroXeroX]

Okay what if I said "The universe doesn't have a creator because it doesn't have a beginning or an end."

How could you prove me wrong? My theory is just as valid as yours.
You have no proof that god created time etc.

lol, you dont believe in god so you must have heard of the big bang theory...
which states that the entire universe originated in a cosmic explosion about 15 billion years ago..

hmm just proved you wrong lol...


Btw, just wondering, those things that people said that if something is given a infinite number of chances, however small the possibilty it will occur one time. Is that proven or something? Is there like a limit even though there is a infinite number of chances?

Also didn't quite understand, what had to happen, over all these million of years, (by infinite chances) for the first cell to be created?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Shredderbeam]

The Big Bang theory describes the initial stages of the universe, its expansion, etc. It does not remark on the creation of the universe.

 

[XeroXeroX]

The big bang model also teaches that the universe had a beginning. In 1929, astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered that the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions. As time moves forward, the universe is growing apart. This means that if one goes back in time the universe would be getting smaller and smaller. Eventually, if one goes back far enough into the past, the entire universe would be what scientists call "a point of infinite density." This marks the beginning of the universe, the big bang.

 

[Shredderbeam]

That is a common misconception. The Big Bang does not refer to the beginning of the universe, or what caused it, but rather, what happened after what appears to be "time zero".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

 

[XeroXeroX]

That is a common misconception. The Big Bang does not refer to the beginning of the universe, or what caused it, but rather, what happened after what appears to be "time zero".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

When something is born or has a age, it must have a begin.

On that url you provided me with, on # 2.1 Timeline of the Big Bang (contents)
Again, it states "The early hot, dense phase is itself referred to as "the Big Bang",[21] and is considered the "birth" of our universe." (Birth, meaning it has to have a beginning, otherwise it wouldn't have been born, but just been there.

"the universe has a calculated age of 13.73 ± 0.12 billion years." meaning, it has a beginning, or it would have had a infinite age number.

 

[wowhamba]

When something is born or has a age, it must have a begin.

On that url you provided me with, on # 2.1 Timeline of the Big Bang (contents)
Again, it states "The early hot, dense phase is itself referred to as "the Big Bang",[21] and is considered the "birth" of our universe." (Birth, meaning it has to have a beginning, otherwise it wouldn't have been born, but just been there.

"the universe has a calculated age of 13.73 ± 0.12 billion years." meaning, it has a beginning, or it would have had a infinite age number.

There is no valid scientific theory that explains how the universe got here, but we do have facts such as 'matter can't be neither created nor destroyed', We honestly DO NOT know how the universe was created or came into existence but that doesn't mean God did it. Okay so what is your theory of how the universe came into existence Newfag? Please enlighten us.

 

[Shredderbeam]

When something is born or has a age, it must have a begin.

On that url you provided me with, on # 2.1 Timeline of the Big Bang (contents)
Again, it states "The early hot, dense phase is itself referred to as "the Big Bang",[21] and is considered the "birth" of our universe." (Birth, meaning it has to have a beginning, otherwise it wouldn't have been born, but just been there.

"the universe has a calculated age of 13.73 ± 0.12 billion years." meaning, it has a beginning, or it would have had a infinite age number.

Yes, the universe, in terms of time, has a beginning. However, this beginning is not dealt with in the Big Bang Theory.

If I may quote from the Wiki link I posted:

Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition, rather explaining the general evolution of the universe since that instant.

 

[XeroXeroX]

Wowhamba if you can't talk normal here, don't reply back go back to your spam forum where u can act like retards, silly kid.

If the universe has a beginning, then I've proven you wrong and you may shut up now.

I used the big bang theory, because as far as i knew, thats how science thinks the universe exist not me. I believe in religion. So it doesn't matter which scientific theory i've used, as long as we all agree that the universe has a beginning, then your proven wrong.

Shredderbeam may i ask what our scientific knowledge is, of how the universe started or began?
Or is the big bang theory all that's known so far about its existence?