The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-07-2016, 12:58 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-07-2016 03:40 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(29-07-2016 03:14 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Umm, WTF!

Atoms don't decompose.

There is no invisible force stopping decomposition, it is a well known immune system that stops decay.

Living things have evolved an immune system which attacks pathogens, rocks don't have an immune system. Rocks haven't evolved.

Are you for real? Were you perhaps home schooled by your religious parents who saw science as a threat to their beliefs?

Uh Yea they do. In any solution you have reactions that create and decompose chemical compounds. When they rate of formation = rate of decay, the solution is in equilibrium. All living things exist in a state FAR from equilibrium. If you place an ameoba in a sterile environment, it would decompose into a puddle.

I am talking about replicator molecules and other pre-biotic chemical systems that had no immune system. (btw- our immune systems does nothing to stop decay. The immune system attacks foreign organisms and substances.)
Your chemistry is a bit confused.
In chemistry fundamentals you learn the difference between atoms and compounds.
A compound breaking down is not equivalent to atomic decay, this is entirely different.
Atoms decay, they don't decompose.

Atomic decay is not dependant upon whether that atom is part of a living organic structure or if it is part of a non living structure.

Do you have a scientific reference that suggests otherwise?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
30-07-2016, 04:59 AM (This post was last modified: 30-07-2016 06:10 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-07-2016 10:17 PM)u196533 Wrote:  I would discuss the chemistry with you, but I am totally incompetent and unable to say anything about Chemistry and Biology (except, if I can see no other answer, I jump to "oh, it's supernatural", (which is the MOST improbable answer ever devised, and FAR more improbable that ANY scenario yet proposed for abiogenesis).

Fixed that for you.
Typical Creation Ministry bullshit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanopolyyne
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacetylene
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis...n_2006-147

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2016, 07:57 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-07-2016 12:09 PM)u196533 Wrote:  I have degrees in engineering. The things I have proposed are not advanced concepts. I learned them as an undergrad. I took the basic concept that chemicals drive to lower energy and increase entropy, and applied it to the narrative of abiogenesis.

Charming.

You have talked to NO scientists?
You have submitted NO papers for scientific review?

Why should we take you seriously?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
30-07-2016, 08:00 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 12:58 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-07-2016 03:40 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Uh Yea they do. In any solution you have reactions that create and decompose chemical compounds. When they rate of formation = rate of decay, the solution is in equilibrium. All living things exist in a state FAR from equilibrium. If you place an ameoba in a sterile environment, it would decompose into a puddle.

I am talking about replicator molecules and other pre-biotic chemical systems that had no immune system. (btw- our immune systems does nothing to stop decay. The immune system attacks foreign organisms and substances.)
Your chemistry is a bit confused.
In chemistry fundamentals you learn the difference between atoms and compounds.
A compound breaking down is not equivalent to atomic decay, this is entirely different.
Atoms decay, they don't decompose.

Atomic decay is not dependant upon whether that atom is part of a living organic structure or if it is part of a non living structure.

Do you have a scientific reference that suggests otherwise?

I don't think I ever said atoms decay. I am sorry if my wording led you to think that. I thought from the context it was clear that I meant complex molecules breakdown into simpler structures.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2016, 08:02 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 07:57 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(29-07-2016 12:09 PM)u196533 Wrote:  I have degrees in engineering. The things I have proposed are not advanced concepts. I learned them as an undergrad. I took the basic concept that chemicals drive to lower energy and increase entropy, and applied it to the narrative of abiogenesis.

Charming.

You have talked to NO scientists?
You have submitted NO papers for scientific review?

Why should we take you seriously?

I used to work for Baxter a Pharmaeutical company. I used to debate this with all of the chemists during lunch.

This is Chem 101. It isn't rocket science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2016, 08:57 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 08:02 AM)u196533 Wrote:  
(30-07-2016 07:57 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Charming.

You have talked to NO scientists?
You have submitted NO papers for scientific review?

Why should we take you seriously?

I used to work for Baxter a Pharmaeutical company. I used to debate this with all of the chemists during lunch.

This is Chem 101. It isn't rocket science.

As far as I'm concerned the posters here have refuted your ideas. When accredited scientific journals publish your work and it passes peer review, then we will have something to talk about.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
30-07-2016, 09:02 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 08:02 AM)u196533 Wrote:  
(30-07-2016 07:57 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Charming.

You have talked to NO scientists?
You have submitted NO papers for scientific review?

Why should we take you seriously?

I used to work for Baxter a Pharmaeutical company. I used to debate this with all of the chemists during lunch.

This is Chem 101. It isn't rocket science.

And I used to work for Santa. It *is* Chem 101, and you haven't mastered it. So sod off with your pretending.

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
30-07-2016, 09:22 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 08:02 AM)u196533 Wrote:  I used to work for Baxter a Pharmaeutical company. I used to debate this with all of the chemists during lunch.

I used to work for a hospital. Brain surgery anyone? After all, I have discussed it with some of the best. Quite interesting too. Can't wait to try it.

"They think, therefore I am" - god
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TechnoMonkey's post
30-07-2016, 12:19 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 08:02 AM)u196533 Wrote:  
(30-07-2016 07:57 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Charming.

You have talked to NO scientists?
You have submitted NO papers for scientific review?

Why should we take you seriously?

I used to work for Baxter a Pharmaeutical company. I used to debate this with all of the chemists during lunch.

This is Chem 101. It isn't rocket science.

But it is rocket science, my friend, it is.

You see, NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab is one of the top world leaders in abiogenesis chemistry research, publishing numerous papers on their findings every year (a simple Google search of the JPL's website for abiogenesis references will show you this), as it has a direct impact on our search for life or its precursors in the rest of the solar system.

You are also forgetting that several of us here have degrees in physics, chemistry, evolutionary biology, and/or biochemistry (myself included), and have experience working in this field. While I did not work in abiogenesis research, myself, I did work in a genetics lab as part of some of my graduate school fieldwork, and my wife works in one to this day.

There is one simple fact that is clear to us:

You have fallen for the Creation Research Institute (or whatever they're calling themselves, this week) propaganda that tells you a lot of science-y stuff which sounds legitimate to someone who doesn't grasp how to read the actual research papers, or who is willing to take them at their word when they "quote-mine" real scientists out of context to make arguments that they're not really making.

An example is your quote, which you tried to pass off as your own, that turns out to be wholly wrong (as its rebuttal was rebutted immediately) and deliberately lifted from the larger article in order to present only the first half of the argument.

This sort of blatant dishonesty is why no one takes Creationists seriously. Well, that and the fact that you believe in magic, yet spend so much of your time trying to mock those of us who'd rather believe in reality.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
30-07-2016, 02:33 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(30-07-2016 08:00 AM)u196533 Wrote:  I don't think I ever said atoms decay. I am sorry if my wording led you to think that. I thought from the context it was clear that I meant complex molecules breakdown into simpler structures.
Do you realise that cells replicate themselves. That they continuously generate proteins. That cells also continuously die off.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: