home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.prophecies.nostradamus      Worshipping fucknut Nostradamus      125,730 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 124,014 of 125,730   
   JTEM to Steven Douglas   
   Re: Where did life on earth come from?   
   18 Dec 25 01:26:32   
   
   From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/18/25 1:06 AM, Steven Douglas wrote:   
      
   > There is so much evidence for God, that a person has   
   > to be willfully blind to not see it.   
      
   No. Not really.   
      
   >> We can start with fossils. They stretch back billions   
   >> of years. But moths don't. Cats don't. Lizards don't.   
      
   > There is nothing in the fossil record that shows one   
   > species turning into another species.   
      
   That's just a misunderstanding of the evidence.   
      
   >> Anyway, we have a fossil record which, though extremely   
   >> far from complete, does show a picture of increasing   
   >> complexity.   
      
   > Like the Cambrian Explosion?   
      
   Yes. Like the Cambrian explosion. We see the very first   
   glimpse at what looks like a spinal cord, for example.   
      
   There's very little preserved from that period and the   
   consensus these days leans towards a preservation bias --   
   it wasn't a sudden "Explosion," it's a case where not   
   much of the earth from that period survives.   
      
   >> And that is evidence. So unless by   
   >> "Evidence" you mean "Proof," there's plenty of fossil   
   >> evidence.   
   >   
   > The Cambrian Explosion produced a lot of new life forms   
   > in far too quick a time to be explained by evolution.   
      
   Not true at all.   
      
   What are you pretending is the time? How much was needed?   
      
   >> There's also DNA evidence, which strongly supports the   
   >> Common Descent of life.   
      
   > DNA is far too complex to have evolved all by itself.   
      
   Not true. That's just a misunderstanding of DNA.   
      
   Humans actually don't have as many genes as some other   
   species!   
      
   > It's literally a machine, and it's capable of doing   
   > things that indicate a Creator must have created it.   
      
   It's not a machine and it's not doing anything that only   
   a creator can do.   
      
   >>> It's possible that the body of captive body of water   
   >>> might have been the scene of a flood at some point   
   >>> in the past, and fish and other lifeforms wound up   
   >>> in that body of water before the flood receded.   
   >>   
   >> People who talk about/investigate this stuff don't seem   
   >> to think so, in a lot of cases.   
      
   > What's their explanation?   
      
   Two explanations -- no proof -- are that birds are carrying   
   this life from body of water to body of water. One says that   
   the birds are failing to digest the eggs of some life, pooping   
   them out in a new location, and the other says that they get   
   stuck to feet or in feather or whatever, and carried to new   
   locations that way.   
      
   It's not a particularly hot topic for me but I've never seen   
   any hard science backing any explanation.   
      
   >> The real problem is not their failure. It's that success   
   >> would be proof positive of creation. That, it would be   
   >> proof that AN INTELLIGENCE can BY DESIGN bring life into   
   >> existence. It would not nor could not prove that abiogenesis   
   >> ever happened.   
      
   > They've tried to duplicate the conditions of the   
   > chaotic world in which they claim life popped into   
   > existence all by itself. They can't do it because   
   > it didn't happen all by itself. There had to be a   
   > Creator who created life, and everything else.   
      
   Again, the failure does nothing but expose the religious   
   adherence to the belief. SUCCESS would be a huge problem   
   for them though, because THAT would be proof of creationism.   
   It would be an example of creationism!   
      
   >> Yes. And it had countless opportunities to start elsewhere BEFORE   
   >> it had an opportunity here. So I conclude that it most likely   
   >> arrived here from elsewhere.   
      
   > How did it survive the ride through space?   
      
   Why wouldn't it survive?   
      
   Google:  Oldest surviving bacteria.   
      
   Apparently it can survive long enough to reach the nearest GALAXY,   
   never mind solar system!   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca