If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TG Daily)   New experiment will force creationist arguments to evolve   (tgdaily.com) divider line 229
    More: Cool, evolution, hind limbs, desert island, University of Rhode Island, genetic variation, genetic analysis, natural selection  
•       •       •

10817 clicks; posted to Geek » on 03 Feb 2012 at 1:15 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



229 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-03 02:56:06 PM

defone: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

You might want to decide which idea you are wanting to address.


LOL its a cop-out. If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

Come on people this has to easy ... how did life begin? What kicked evolution into motion?
 
2012-02-03 02:56:51 PM

nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?


Here let me help, you see, your first mistake was step 1... I would help you out, however you, and people like you would just tell me that there is no such thing as self replicating chemicals, even though there are literally hundreds of thousands of samples in labs all over the world.

Your ignorance of science does not disqualify the validity of the science, it just shows your ignorance....

herp de derp de do...
 
2012-02-03 02:56:54 PM

nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?

Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.
 
2012-02-03 02:57:35 PM

nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?


...and here's where you go off the rails....
 
2012-02-03 02:58:38 PM

defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.


Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?
 
2012-02-03 02:59:39 PM

Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....


Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.
 
2012-02-03 03:01:41 PM

nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.


Kanabiis: ... I would help you out, however you, and people like you would just tell me that there is no such thing as self replicating chemicals, even though there are literally hundreds of thousands of samples in labs all over the world.


Kanabiis gave you a clue but my guess is you are too lazy or stupid to google/read up on it.
 
2012-02-03 03:03:22 PM

nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?


I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.
 
2012-02-03 03:03:57 PM

buck1138: nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.

Kanabiis: ... I would help you out, however you, and people like you would just tell me that there is no such thing as self replicating chemicals, even though there are literally hundreds of thousands of samples in labs all over the world.

Kanabiis gave you a clue but my guess is you are too lazy or stupid to google/read up on it.


So life has been created in the lab?
 
2012-02-03 03:05:10 PM

nmemkha: Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.


People would love to have a discussion with you about current theories in abiogenesis if you weren't obviously trolling. Everyone admits that while there are promising leads on the subject, how it actually happened is unknown. The fact that you are pretending that this is a weakness in our understanding of how life evolved for the last billion years or so screams insincerity.

Still, you got bites, so 5/10.
 
2012-02-03 03:05:47 PM

nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.


Well, there is no one accepted and proven model for how life started. But you can read up here for the leading theories, none of which involve acts of god, and several of which have an experimental basis, such as the primordial soup theory being supported by Miller-Urey experiments.
 
2012-02-03 03:05:49 PM

defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.


I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!
 
2012-02-03 03:07:17 PM

Karac: nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.

Well, there is no one accepted and proven model for how life started. But you can read up here for the leading theories, none of which involve acts of god, and several of which have an experimental basis, such as the primordial soup theory being supported by Miller-Urey experiments.


FINALLY

All that hem and hawing because you can't admit science has no answer ... yet.

Wow, I expected better of all of you. Talk about closed minds.
 
2012-02-03 03:08:35 PM

Diogenes: I think it's obvious that God put the "Psych!" gene in those lizards to fool us all.

Tricky guy, that God.


Of course the interesting part is if so much of universe is deliberately messed up by God to deceive people into thinking the universe is billions of years old, etc., doesn't that also open the question that he could have set up the Bible to deceive people just as easily. Once you go down the "God is a liar" route, I can't see you can end up with a very viable religion unless you spend a lot of time making sure everyone can't think for themselves and is very good at shutting out all the obvious flaws in your nutty belief system.
 
2012-02-03 03:08:46 PM

nmemkha: buck1138: nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.

Kanabiis: ... I would help you out, however you, and people like you would just tell me that there is no such thing as self replicating chemicals, even though there are literally hundreds of thousands of samples in labs all over the world.

Kanabiis gave you a clue but my guess is you are too lazy or stupid to google/read up on it.

So life has been created in the lab?


Very nearly. Close enough that you have to split hairs over the definition of life to discount it.
 
2012-02-03 03:11:46 PM

isheltoe: Nothing to really see here...

Three types of Evolution

General - Lizard becomes Dog


How about synapsid ('lizard') becomes mammal?

"General" evolution is just "Special" evolution + time. And life has been on Earth for a *long* farking time.

Evolution happens. Period.

Also, 'theory', in a scientific context, does not mean what you seem to think it means. Gravity is 'just a theory'.
 
2012-02-03 03:12:23 PM

nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!


Wait, so are you wanting evolution, which is what this article is about, or are you wanting abiogenesis? Again, not having a basic knowledge of any of it, I am not sure you will understand.

Abiogenesis has several theories, some of which show promise.

Here's a neat one:
Link (new window)

Of course this one may have shown how the basics of RNA can be created from simple ingredients.Link (new window)

But in all honesty, abiogenesis has no proven theories yet. So?
 
2012-02-03 03:13:02 PM

nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!


How about this, next time you have a Staph infection, just let your doctor know that evolution is a lie, just treat you with Penicillin.

My guess is, you won't be around long enough to debate this much longer...

But hey, at least you sure showed us... right? right?

Science has given you all the amazing things you take for granted every day... the fact that you get to post your ignorance on the intertubes is proof that science doesn't need your faith to survive.
 
2012-02-03 03:14:39 PM

defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

Wait, so are you wanting evolution, which is what this article is about, or are you wanting abiogenesis? Again, not having a basic knowledge of any of it, I am not sure you will understand.

Abiogenesis has several theories, some of which show promise.

Here's a neat one:
Link (new window)

Of course this one may have shown how the basics of RNA can be created from simple ingredients.Link (new window)

But in all honesty, abiogenesis has no proven theories yet. So?


So evolution is a lie, the Earth is 6000 years old, and the Bible is literally true.
 
2012-02-03 03:15:18 PM

Kanabiis: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

How about this, next time you have a Staph infection, just let your doctor know that evolution is a lie, just treat you with Penicillin.

My guess is, you won't be around long enough to debate this much longer...

But hey, at least you sure showed us... right? right?

Science has given you all the amazing things you take for granted every day... the fact that you get to post your ignorance on the intertubes is proof that science doesn't need your faith to survive.


u mad?
 
2012-02-03 03:16:47 PM
Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.
 
2012-02-03 03:17:55 PM

nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.


I assume stupidity comes naturally to you, must have got that from your parents.
 
2012-02-03 03:19:21 PM

nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.


You do realize trolling is (allegedly) against the Fark rules, yes? 'Course, the mods don't seem to give a fark, so you're probably safe.
 
2012-02-03 03:20:59 PM

nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.


So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?
 
2012-02-03 03:21:21 PM

defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

Wait, so are you wanting evolution, which is what this article is about, or are you wanting abiogenesis? Again, not having a basic knowledge of any of it, I am not sure you will understand.

Abiogenesis has several theories, some of which show promise.

Here's a neat one:
Link (new window)

Of course this one may have shown how the basics of RNA can be created from simple ingredients.Link (new window)

But in all honesty, abiogenesis has no proven theories yet. So?


The right answer we don't know how life began on Earth. Its a huge whole that most "defenders of the faith" dance around. You have seen all the vitriol and I said nothing very contentious. I did not say evolution was wrong, I just asked how life began, LOL.

Maybe I wandered on to the religious fanatic board or something ...
 
2012-02-03 03:21:31 PM

Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?


He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.
 
2012-02-03 03:21:56 PM

Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?


What did I say that was anti-science specifically?
 
2012-02-03 03:23:04 PM
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/6920693/74751814#c74751814" target="_blank">nmemkha</a>:</b> <i>Kanabiis: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

How about this, next time you have a Staph infection, just let your doctor know that evolution is a lie, just treat you with Penicillin.

My guess is, you won't be around long enough to debate this much longer...

But hey, at least you sure showed us... right? right?

Science has given you all the amazing things you take for granted every day... the fact that you get to post your ignorance on the intertubes is proof that science doesn't need your faith to survive.

u mad?</i>

Me, mad? Why would I be, your ignorance has no direct impact on my life...

However, if your doctor was as ignorant as you are, you would be dead... thankfully, people like you don't become doctors or scientists, and the world is a better place. Unless you think small pox is a gift from god....
 
2012-02-03 03:23:07 PM

nmemkha: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

What did I say that was anti-science specifically?


I didn't, goalpost mover, now answer my question.
 
2012-02-03 03:23:17 PM

LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.


The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.
 
2012-02-03 03:24:23 PM

Impasse: nmemkha: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

What did I say that was anti-science specifically?

I didn't, goalpost mover, now answer my question.


The posts speak for themselves. Go read what I wrote and what people replied.

You all trolled yourselves basically in you rush to condemn.
 
2012-02-03 03:24:28 PM

nmemkha: Martian_Astronomer: nmemkha: If evolution is a complete theory then how did it all start?

...and here's where you go off the rails....

Just answer the question and its all good. I am looking for answers in science. Surely you smart people can help me.


A number of scientists have created decent hypothesis and have found a number of the mechanisms, but the total answer is not understood.

Realize, however, that what you're doing is arguing with a physicist about how quickly a rock is falling down the mountain by appealing to how the rock was formed on top of the mountain to begin with. It's completely meaningless, and immaterial to the conversation. We're talking about rates of speed, rotation, and when it will reach the bottom, and you're arguing that they're wrong because they haven't solved how sediment forms on a hilltop.
 
2012-02-03 03:24:30 PM

KiltedBastich: The only question that really remains is whether you're just deliberately willfully ignorant, or are you really that utterly hidebound and incapable of learning. The former is contemptible, the latter pathetic.


I can answer that. In a previous thread we got Bevets to concede that maybe the whole "creation" thingy happened way-way back in time. Not 6 thousand years ago. Further he allowed that things may have evolved, a bit, since then, but it was still all God's Plan.

Now he's just trolling.
 
2012-02-03 03:24:42 PM

nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.


It's certainly easier than responding to their answers when you ask how did life start or has it been created in a lab.

Defone's answers
My two

Care to refute our citations?
 
CDP [TotalFark]
2012-02-03 03:25:42 PM

nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

I give you 1/10 you should try some type of comical graphic
 
2012-02-03 03:26:37 PM

Karac: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

It's certainly easier than responding to their answers when you ask how did life start or has it been created in a lab.

Defone's answers
My two

Care to refute our citations?


From the 1st article you linked:

"The inventors call it the world's first synthetic cell, although this initial step is more a re-creation of existing life -- changing one simple type of bacterium into another -- than a built-from-scratch kind."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/20/scientists-announce-produce- living-cell-using-manmade-dna/#ixzz1lLuutpR6

Do you feel stupid?
 
2012-02-03 03:26:46 PM

Bevets: A lack of evidence is not the problem, never was the problem. A belief system which teaches people that evidence and reason are less important than faith - belief in the absence of evidence - THAT is the problem.

Many folks, like the congenitally and willfully ignorant mongbiohazard up there, have been taught that they can just ignore evidence that they don't like and believe what they WANT to believe, evidence and logic be damned. They're making a conscious choice to eschew logic and/or reason.

THAT is why it's so important to fight the indoctrination of children into religious beliefs. We should not let religious people push their teachings on children without a fight. At least during the fight you can introduce the children to the alternative viewpoint of the importance of basic freakin' logic and reason and weaken the deleterious effects of teaching the primacy of faith.


1. Submit evolution thread
2. Make usual asinine arguments
3. Submit links to your own farking page (wtf?)
4. Profit?

WTF is this bullshiat?

/sponsored link is sponsored
 
2012-02-03 03:27:17 PM

nmemkha: LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.

The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.


No, the problem is you confused two entirely different fields of science which just made you seem unintelligent and uneducated. You gave a gotcha question that had no basis in reality and then came out as a troll when facts were given.
 
2012-02-03 03:28:11 PM

nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: defone: nmemkha: WrestlerManager: nmemkha: Let's go over evolution:

1. A bunch of non-living organic molecules float around in the primordial soup
2. ???
3. Simple life appears and begins to evolve.

Anyone got a good answer for step #2?

That's not evolution. It's genesis. Two completely different constructs.

One follows the other. How did life begin?
Different set of questions. How life began, and how life evolves are two totally different things. Study a little more and then come back with some idea.

Well answer it then. Surely science knows the answer! Dawkins?! Anyone?

I'm not sure I would waste my time with somebody who doesn't seem to even have the basic grasp of evolution.

I say you can't.

Show everyone what a fool I am and cite any peer-reviewed paper that states scientists created life, from "scratch" as in the primordial earth, in a lab.

Call me out!

Wait, so are you wanting evolution, which is what this article is about, or are you wanting abiogenesis? Again, not having a basic knowledge of any of it, I am not sure you will understand.

Abiogenesis has several theories, some of which show promise.

Here's a neat one:
Link (new window)

Of course this one may have shown how the basics of RNA can be created from simple ingredients.Link (new window)

But in all honesty, abiogenesis has no proven theories yet. So?

The right answer we don't know how life began on Earth. Its a huge whole that most "defenders of the faith" dance around. You have seen all the vitriol and I said nothing very contentious. I did not say evolution was wrong, I just asked how life began, LOL.

Maybe I wandered on to the religious fanatic board or something ...

Which had nothing to do with the article. Of course I never said we know, I said there are some good ideas. Of course I also gave you an example of creating life in a lab. Which you seemed to want desperately. When you are a troll, it actually takes some intelligence. I think you may have just trolled yourself. Good luck sir and thanks for turning my window red with troll colors (I can take the complete idiot off of the troll or complete idiot in my favorite, on second thought, it still seems to fit).
 
2012-02-03 03:28:28 PM

buck1138: nmemkha: LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.

The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.

No, the problem is you confused two entirely different fields of science which just made you seem unintelligent and uneducated. You gave a gotcha question that had no basis in reality and then came out as a troll when facts were given.


Asking how life began "question that had no basis in reality"?

WTF? Seriously?
 
2012-02-03 03:28:50 PM

nmemkha: LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.

The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.


No, we are simply trying to understand how someone with the resources to educate themselves seem so uninterested in doing so... Its like a guy with a huge piece of shiat on their nose and a tissue in their hand wondering why they can't get the shiat off their face. It's frustrating after telling them a hundred times to just use the tissue to wipe it off, yet they still keep standing there with the shiat on their face.

Do some research... educate yourself, the answers to your questions are out there..... God did it is not an answer, its a cop out.
 
2012-02-03 03:29:33 PM

nmemkha: Karac: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

It's certainly easier than responding to their answers when you ask how did life start or has it been created in a lab.

Defone's answers
My two

Care to refute our citations?

From the 1st article you linked:

"The inventors call it the world's first synthetic cell, although this initial step is more a re-creation of existing life -- changing one simple type of bacterium into another -- than a built-from-scratch kind."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/20/scientists-announce-produce- living-cell-using-manmade-dna/#ixzz1lLuutpR6

Do you feel stupid?


And the other three links? How are they incorrect?
 
2012-02-03 03:29:33 PM

nmemkha: Impasse: nmemkha: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

What did I say that was anti-science specifically?

I didn't, goalpost mover, now answer my question.

The posts speak for themselves. Go read what I wrote and what people replied.

You all trolled yourselves basically in you rush to condemn.


i.e., you can't answer my question.
 
2012-02-03 03:30:36 PM

Kanabiis: nmemkha: LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.

The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.

No, we are simply trying to understand how someone with the resources to educate themselves seem so uninterested in doing so... Its like a guy with a huge piece of shiat on their nose and a tissue in their hand wondering why they can't get the shiat off their face. It's frustrating after telling them a hundred times to just use the tissue to wipe it off, yet they still keep standing there with the shiat on their face.

Do some research... educate yourself, the answers to your questions are out there..... God did it is not an answer, its a cop out.


I never said anything about God.

I just asked how life began.
 
2012-02-03 03:32:24 PM

Karac: nmemkha: Karac: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

It's certainly easier than responding to their answers when you ask how did life start or has it been created in a lab.

Defone's answers
My two

Care to refute our citations?

From the 1st article you linked:

"The inventors call it the world's first synthetic cell, although this initial step is more a re-creation of existing life -- changing one simple type of bacterium into another -- than a built-from-scratch kind."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/20/scientists-announce-produce- living-cell-using-manmade-dna/#ixzz1lLuutpR6

Do you feel stupid?

And the other three links? How are they incorrect?


2nd link:

"However, though researchers have been able to show how RNA's component molecules, called ribonucleotides, could assemble into RNA, their many attempts to synthesize these ribonucleotides have failed. No matter how they combined the ingredients - a sugar, a phosphate, and one of four different nitrogenous molecules, or nucleobases - ribonucleotides just wouldn't form"
 
2012-02-03 03:34:49 PM

Shostie: No, no. This is MICROevolution. This is perfectly acceptable. Macroevolution doesn't exist because we can't stand the idea that our ancestors may have f*cked a few monkeys.


But that's how God got HIV into humans to punish the gays.
 
2012-02-03 03:37:52 PM

nmemkha: I never said anything about God.

I just asked how life began.


No. That's not what you said. What you said was "let's go over evolution", then listed a 3 point series that had nothing to do with evolution, and acted like an asshole when people pointed out that they were separate issues and were immaterial to the discussion. Then you continued to bait and dance like a self-important fool for 20 posts or so, and patted yourself on the back for derailing a discussion with meaningless drivel.
 
2012-02-03 03:39:53 PM

Its sad then "men of science" act like the very unreasoning and quick to condemn religious fanatics they despise.

southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com
"We will murder the believers in the name of Science!"
 
2012-02-03 03:39:54 PM

nmemkha: Kanabiis: nmemkha: LordJiro: Impasse: nmemkha: Trolling frothing at the mouth Atheists is far too easy.

So being science minded = frothing at the mouth atheism?

He's an admitted troll. Don't bother.

The funny thing is, I never said anything negative about evolution or science. If you read what I wrote and the responses, a lot of you come on like ... well religious fanatics.

No, we are simply trying to understand how someone with the resources to educate themselves seem so uninterested in doing so... Its like a guy with a huge piece of shiat on their nose and a tissue in their hand wondering why they can't get the shiat off their face. It's frustrating after telling them a hundred times to just use the tissue to wipe it off, yet they still keep standing there with the shiat on their face.

Do some research... educate yourself, the answers to your questions are out there..... God did it is not an answer, its a cop out.

I never said anything about God.

I just asked how life began.


If you were truly curious about this, why are you not studying it? See, there are hundreds of thousands of people just like you wondering, how did life begin?

The difference between them and you are, these people went on to university and received advanced degrees in biology, chemistry and related fields, these people then went on to advanced studies in labs all over the world attempting to discover the answers. Do they have all the answers, No, but then again, advanced biological studies is a field of study that is only a century or so old, and answers to complex biological questions such as this are still quite hard to answer, the fact remains that it IS being studied, the answer may yet come to be. Trolling on an intertube forum certainly does not help the answer come about any faster.

If you were serious about finding the answer you would be looking for it, but it's obvious you are not. But hey, feigning interest is not in any way shape or form the same as saying you are truly curious. Those of us that are truly curious have attempted to point you in the direction of the answers, you choosing not to pursue the answers does not mean they are not being looked for.
 
2012-02-03 03:40:22 PM
tinyarena:

In a previous thread we got Bevets to concede that maybe the whole "creation" thingy happened way-way back in time. Not 6 thousand years ago.

If you are going to speak for me, please back it up with a citation.
 
Displayed 50 of 229 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report