Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-03-2015, 04:50 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:56 AM)The Polyglot Atheist Wrote:  1. Evolution explains the diversity of life. It makes one important first assumption: Life exists. (Duh.) So it doesn't matter how life arose: naturalistic explanations, God, a genie in a bottle, it doesn't matter. Evolution only explains how existing life (already existing life) diversifies over time due to various factors, that can be summarised in the famous non-random selection from random mutation.

2. Abiogenesis explains how life might have arose. It's not at same level as Evolution, as far as evidence goes, but we're getting there.

So:

How did life come to be? Abiogenesis.
How does life diversify? Evolution.

The questions are different, and totally independent. If we discover tomorrow that one of them is false or wrong, it will not have any effect on the other one because their field of study is totally different.

Again, you've wasted some of your previous time by explaining the difference between evolution and abiogenesis. As I said, I never said nor implied that they were the same. Never. So why in the hell are you going through all that trouble to distinguish the two, is beyond me.

But anyway, again, like I have BEEN saying; I am talking about evolution WITHOUT design (God). That is where my critique is, ok? So at this point, we don't know how the hell life could have originated from nonliving material, naturally.

So therefore, abiogenesis COULD be false. Abiogenesis could be something that cannot occur naturally, ok? So if abiogenesis COULD be false, then evolution without God CANNOT be a brute fact. You just said that evolution depends on life which already exists, but if abiogenesis is false, then how could it ever get to the point of diversified life (evolution) if it will never get to the point of the beginning of life (abiogenesis), PERIOD?

Understand? And BTW, you people can whine and complain about it all you want, but everything that I just stated is true. You can't rebuttal the truth, people. I know it may go against your only hope in life, but the truth is the truth, and I am a truth seeker and truth teller regardless of whether it makes you people happy or not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 04:55 PM (This post was last modified: 27-03-2015 06:07 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 04:32 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I will remain stupid and continue to believe in Christianity and be granted eternity life with the Almighty.

Hate to break it to you Skippy, but not only are you going to Hell, you're already there.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
27-03-2015, 05:27 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 04:50 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Again, you've wasted some of your previous time by explaining the difference between evolution and abiogenesis. As I said, I never said nor implied that they were the same. Never. So why in the hell are you going through all that trouble to distinguish the two, is beyond me.

But anyway, again, like I have BEEN saying; I am talking about evolution WITHOUT design (God). That is where my critique is, ok? So at this point, we don't know how the hell life could have originated from nonliving material, naturally.

So therefore, abiogenesis COULD be false. Abiogenesis could be something that cannot occur naturally, ok? So if abiogenesis COULD be false, then evolution without God CANNOT be a brute fact. You just said that evolution depends on life which already exists, but if abiogenesis is false, then how could it ever get to the point of diversified life (evolution) if it will never get to the point of the beginning of life (abiogenesis), PERIOD?

Understand? And BTW, you people can whine and complain about it all you want, but everything that I just stated is true. You can't rebuttal the truth, people. I know it may go against your only hope in life, but the truth is the truth, and I am a truth seeker and truth teller regardless of whether it makes you people happy or not.

My explanation was to show you that they are not dependent on each other. But I see it didn't work.

孤独 - The Out Crowd
Life is a flash of light between two eternities of darkness.
[Image: Schermata%202014-10-24%20alle%2012.39.01.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 05:51 PM
RE: Question about flood
Cotw- we already got to the point of life. Life is all around us.

If there were no life, then yes, evolution doesn't happen, but hey, we're here aren't we.

We have done lots of experiments that show the components of life, organic compounds, can arise from inorganic chemicals. We can produce proteins of life by recreating the early atmosphere on earth from billions of years ago. Done, proven. Time and time again.

Perhaps this is all new information for you.
So far, it seems like we have to start you off at grade 4 and work our way up.

Its definitely an uphill battle just trying to get you to follow along with the material.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rahn127's post
27-03-2015, 07:23 PM
Question about flood
(27-03-2015 04:50 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Understand? And BTW, you people can whine and complain about it all you want, but everything that I just stated is true. You can't rebuttal the truth, people. I know it may go against your only hope in life, but the truth is the truth, and I am a truth seeker and truth teller regardless of whether it makes you people happy or not.
No, you are becoming painful to listen to. Did you actually read ANYTHING that sevenpatch took the time to write for you?

I suggest you stick your face permanantly in your bible, you have no worth in the real world I'm afraid.

Using Tapatalk
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TubbyTubby's post
27-03-2015, 09:04 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 07:23 PM)TubbyTubby Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 04:50 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Understand? And BTW, you people can whine and complain about it all you want, but everything that I just stated is true. You can't rebuttal the truth, people. I know it may go against your only hope in life, but the truth is the truth, and I am a truth seeker and truth teller regardless of whether it makes you people happy or not.
No, you are becoming painful to listen to. Did you actually read ANYTHING that sevenpatch took the time to write for you?

I suggest you stick your face permanantly in your bible, you have no worth in the real world I'm afraid.

To be fair, he posted like 3 minutes after I did, so I doubt he saw what I had to say. Hopefully he does read it all before trying to respond.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 09:26 PM
RE: Question about flood
(13-03-2015 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no altitude problem.

If the sea level rises, the pressure at that new level is 14.7 lb/sq.in. (average) regardless of the rise.

Repeat after me:
There is no altitude problem.
There is no altitude problem.
There is no altitude problem.

Good for you chas, no wonder you shut it down in the AF thread so quickly!

The Index: A/S/K Ask Seek Knock as outlined by Luke 11:5-13
Ot Old testament
Nt New testament
H/S Holy Spirit

If you want to ask me a question feel free to Pm me or E/M me. I will not speak of it to anyone.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 10:24 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 09:26 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(13-03-2015 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no altitude problem.

If the sea level rises, the pressure at that new level is 14.7 lb/sq.in. (average) regardless of the rise.

Repeat after me:
There is no altitude problem.
There is no altitude problem.
There is no altitude problem.

Good for you chas, no wonder you shut it down in the AF thread so quickly!

Aw yeah, feel the BUUUUUURN Rolleyes You guys seriously think this is wit? It's like a fucking retards' convention in this thread.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2015, 06:56 AM
RE: Question about flood
(13-03-2015 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  If the sea level rises, the pressure at that new level is 14.7 lb/sq.in. (average) regardless of the rise.

Well, not strictly. If sea level rises enough to increase the earth's surface area because the planet's mean spherical radius has been enlarged, the blanketing atmosphere will thin as it diffuses to cover the larger area. Raise the sea level high enough and the atmosphere thins to non-existence.

Rough math for a flood that increases earth's radius 6 miles would lower mean sea level pressure from 14.7 lbs/sq inch to 14.656 lbs/sq inch. That's not enough to induce respiratory difficulties, so there's no altitude problem with a flood that just covers the peak of Everest, but no one knows how deep Noah's flood actually got.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2015, 07:33 AM
RE: Question about flood
(28-03-2015 06:56 AM)Airportkid Wrote:  
(13-03-2015 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  If the sea level rises, the pressure at that new level is 14.7 lb/sq.in. (average) regardless of the rise.

Well, not strictly. If sea level rises enough to increase the earth's surface area because the planet's mean spherical radius has been enlarged, the blanketing atmosphere will thin as it diffuses to cover the larger area. Raise the sea level high enough and the atmosphere thins to non-existence.

Rough math for a flood that increases earth's radius 6 miles would lower mean sea level pressure from 14.7 lbs/sq inch to 14.656 lbs/sq inch. That's not enough to induce respiratory difficulties, so there's no altitude problem with a flood that just covers the peak of Everest, but no one knows how deep Noah's flood actually got.

I know precisely how deep Noah's flood got. Drinking Beverage

Sea level. There was no fucking flood.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: