Apologetics is bad for Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-02-2014, 12:01 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 10:32 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(27-02-2014 09:34 AM)toadaly Wrote:  ...or maybe it *is* still relevant, and that's why it's still discussed. You haven't explained why it isn't relevant. You've simply picked nits on the very first experiment in the series, ignoring the rest.
I've explained why it isn't relevant repeatedly - the atmosphere they used is no longer considered to have actually existed on the early earth.

So all the experiments Miller did with varying conditions, all used the wrong atmosphere...and not only that, but so far off that the conclusions are invalid? You are obsessed with only the very first such experiment performed, and ignore everything else. Further, you simply refuse to acknowledge that a wide variety of conditions have produced amino acids - including in interstellar space, proving it is not necessary to know or use an exact model of the early earth.

It's hard to imagine what you think you are accomplishing with such an asinine line of argument.

Quote:
Quote:Miller was a brilliant and dedicated scientist, but his failure to find nucleotides in his experiments is not the end of investigation. Why would it be? That isn't how science works.
I don't know - ask Mathilda, it was her position. This is an all-too-common tag-team tactic.

I've read through the posts, and I can't find where Mathilda stated that the RNA world view was dead. Maybe I missed it, but that seems to be *your* assertion, nor hers.

Quote:
Quote:That isn't how science works. Powner, Gerland, and Sutherland published the results of an experiment they performed, in which activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides were in fact formed under conditions designed to mimic a pre-biotic earth, so the RNA world hypothesis is far from dead.
That's nice. Far from dead isn't alive though. Unless you think these are life, you have another instance of scientists taking some chemicals and turning them into others.

...it's not life, but it does mean the RNA world view is not dead as you stated.

We all know, yourself included, that nothing would be sufficient to convince you that life can occur naturally. But that's not even what the current discussion is about. We're just talking about organic chemistry, and you can't even accept that much, even when the results are published and repeated.

Book mark these pages. If you ever lose your faith, come back and reread your own arguments for hours and hours of self face palming entertainment.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes toadaly's post
27-02-2014, 12:14 PM (This post was last modified: 27-02-2014 12:20 PM by rampant.a.i..)
Apologetics is bad for Christianity
This is why apologetics is bad for Christianity: Any outside observer is aware Alpha has narrowed the topic of discussion to an area of science so new that it lacks exhaustive data, and demanded conclusive evidence.

It's a red herring that has nothing to do with apologetics, because he's not competent at debating any other topic, because he's unable to form arguments and support them with evidence.

This is classic apologetic behavior: Distract from your own inability to support your claims by demanding evidence for something irrelevant and off-topic, then claim to have "won" without actually addressing the topic at all.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
27-02-2014, 12:59 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 12:14 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  It's a red herring that has nothing to do with apologetics, because he's not competent at debating any other topic, because he's unable to form arguments and support them with evidence.


You had me at "he's not competent debating". Big Grin

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 01:08 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 11:28 AM)donotwant Wrote:  
alpha male Wrote:Scientists will perform any experiment they can get a grant for.
Now we are getting into conspiracy theories.

Hell, while you're at it, say that clergy men will lead any congregation that will tithe. There's as much proof and substance, there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
27-02-2014, 01:12 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 12:14 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  This is why apologetics is bad for Christianity: Any outside observer is aware Alpha has narrowed the topic of discussion to an area of science so new that it lacks exhaustive data, and demanded conclusive evidence.

It's a red herring that has nothing to do with apologetics, because he's not competent at debating any other topic, because he's unable to form arguments and support them with evidence.

This is classic apologetic behavior: Distract from your own inability to support your claims by demanding evidence for something irrelevant and off-topic, then claim to have "won" without actually addressing the topic at all.

That's how he rolls. In other discussions he'll say something, and when questioned, shriek "red herring" and refuse to address what he actually said. He laser-focuses on "low hanging fruit", and that's about it. Note how any time he makes a single post in a thread (as opposed to getting into a discussion) that he snipes at one little side aspect of the thread and doesn't actually engage the topic of the OP.

He's just trollin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
27-02-2014, 01:43 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 12:01 PM)toadaly Wrote:  So all the experiments Miller did with varying conditions, all used the wrong atmosphere...and not only that, but so far off that the conclusions are invalid?
I don't know, as they haven't been presented for consideration.
Quote:You are obsessed with only the very first such experiment performed, and ignore everything else. Further, you simply refuse to acknowledge that a wide variety of conditions have produced amino acids - including in interstellar space, proving it is not necessary to know or use an exact model of the early earth.
Amino acids are all around us. So what? We've never seen them come to life.
Quote:I don't know - ask Mathilda, it was her position. This is an all-too-common tag-team tactic.

I've read through the posts, and I can't find where Mathilda stated that the RNA world view was dead. Maybe I missed it, but that seems to be *your* assertion, nor hers.[/quote]Mathilda said that Einstein's failures saved other scientists from wasting their careers. you say that's not how science works. Fight it out between yourselves.

Quote:...it's not life, but it does mean the RNA world view is not dead as you stated.
Where did I say that?
Quote:We all know, yourself included, that nothing would be sufficient to convince you that life can occur naturally.
That's ridiculous. Observation of life occurring naturally would convince me that life can occur naturally.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 02:47 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 01:12 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  He's just trollin.

And he's not even interested in the bridge I wanted to sell.

Git.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
27-02-2014, 02:55 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
Christianity is apologetics.

There's nothing else to it.

"If you're going my way, I'll go with you."- Jim Croce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kestrel's post
27-02-2014, 03:06 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 02:55 PM)Kestrel Wrote:  Christianity is apologetics.

There's nothing else to it.

Yeah no idea why would anyone be a believer Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2014, 03:09 PM
RE: Apologetics is bad for Christianity
(27-02-2014 03:06 PM)donotwant Wrote:  
(27-02-2014 02:55 PM)Kestrel Wrote:  Christianity is apologetics.

There's nothing else to it.

Yeah no idea why would anyone be a believer Big Grin

A very reasonable position for a non-believer.
Drinking Beverage

"If you're going my way, I'll go with you."- Jim Croce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kestrel's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: