Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You're mixing Truth with error. Evolution and God are diametrically opposed. They do not coexist. God has declared by His Word how He created the Heavens (i.e. space, atmosphere) and the earth: by His words.As far as mechanics here is how God did it:
God made world. God made world that run to scientific reasoning. God and science are incompatible...
Ah, did I miss something JIA? Clearly if the world works in a scientific fashion then God and science need not be diametrically opposed.
God speaks and things "be" "exist" or "come into being." That explains why there are no transitional fossil forms. All life came into being suddenly or instantaneously.
Except that doesn't work because all species that have existed did not exist at the same time. It is something you need to get your head around - large mammals, humans etc - did not exist till thousands of years after the dinosaurs died out.
Birds didn't exist in the beginning.
Not all dinosaurs existed at the same time. Some species didn't come about till millions of years after another.
That phrase doesn't work. Either evolution exist, or God has been periodically coming back to wipe out species and make new ones for millions of years.
Genesis 1:3 Then God said“Let there be light”; and there was light.
Except that if he created the heavens creating light wouldn't be needed - since light is natural by product of stars, and stars are a part of the heavens... so sounds like God is doubling up, claiming one creative moment is actually two.
[B]Genesis 1:11
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.[/b]
Though like animals all plant life did not... in fact appear at one.
[B]Genesis 1:14
Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;[/b]
Here God takes credit for natural processes involving gravity which leads to orbit - since this is going on all over the universe where ever a planet orbits a star. Or a moon a planet.
[B]Genesis 1:20
Then God said, “Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens.”[/b]
Nope, no birds for millions of years.
[B]Genesis 1:24
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.[/b]
God creating animals out of nothing?
God has explicitly stated (in no uncertain terms) how He created the universe (He did so through speaking) so why even bring up a hypothetical like evolution in reference to God creating? Based on the record that we have of humanity's origin it is clear that God did not want to use an inferior method like evolution. Evolution is a protracted process that supposedly occurs over eons of years. But everything that God does has a spiritual import and significance. For example, human beings are the only creatures that are made in God's image. No other creature has this claim to fame. Evolution presupposes that all organisms evolved from lower life forms into higher life forms. This process runs counter to God's process of creating creatures that are in His image. God's image is not that of a lower life form that evolved into a higher life form. So right off of the bat this methodology will not work. God wanted creatures that were made in His image and that were made fully mature and ready to reproduce from inception.
So you say, and in the process subscribe to a religious theory that does not work - from the most basic since all life did not exist at once. Species came and went over millions of years. Either the Genesis account is wrong... or the Genesis account is wrong.
WHY LIFE COULD NOT SELF-ORIGINATE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of scientific reasons why living creatures could not just come into existence by themselves—is astounding. Here are 30 of them. The self-origination of life is impossible! Evolutionary theory is unworkable. It is a myth. Only God could have created the plants and animals. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.
This material is excerpted from the book, PRIMITIVE ENVIRONMENT. (See BOOKSTORE) An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.
You will have a better understanding of the following statements by scientists if you will also read the web page, Primitive Environment.
Here are a few of the many problems to be solved, before sand and water could change itself into living creatures:
1 - Spontaneous generation has been scientifically disproved
2 - Instant success would have to be necessary for the life form to survive
3 - Thousands of essential body parts and thousands more of essential chemical compounds would have to instantly form themselves
4 - Both male and female forms would need to make themselves and be near each other in space and time
5 - Law of mass action would immediately destroy chemical compounds
6 - Water is never enough to produce life chemicals
7 - There is no lab equipment out in nature
8 - Condensation problem: Water must be carefully removed for fats, sugars, and nucleic acids to derive out of protein
9 - Precipitation problem: Enzymes would immediately be destroyed
10 - Most life chemicals not found in watery environment
11 - Lightning bolts only damage and kill and could not be the energy source
12 - Oxygen problem: Life could not originate where there is oxygen
13 - Life could not survive without continual oxygen
14 - Oxidized iron is found in rocks existing where life is said to have originated
15 - Life can not originate without water. But there can be no water without oxygen
16 - A reducing atmosphere (no oxygen) would produce life-killing peroxides
17 - Ultraviolet light in reducing atmosphere would immediately kill life
18 - Without oxygen, there would be no protective ozone layer
19 - Proteins would immediately hydrolyze and destroy themselves
20 - There would not be enough chemicals available to form even the simplest protein
21 - Nitrogen is in most biochemicals, but there is not enough concentrated nitrogen in nature to form life
22 - There is not enough available phosporus in nature either
23 - Scientists have no idea how to make fatty acids or how they could make themselves
24 - The atmosphere throughout the world would have to instantly change from no oxygen to its present oxygen-rich content
25 - Extremely complicated chemical combinations not found in nonliving material exist in living tissue
26 - Residue problem: Since such extremely rich chemical mixtures are found in living things, we should find residues of them in nature, but they do not exist
27 - Accidental formations of amino acids would produce equal amounts of left- and right-handed forms which exist in animal life
28 - Dissolution problem: Even if correct chemicals gather together, the next instant they would spontaneously disintegrate by forming with other chemicals
29 - Immediate, complete duplication and reproduction of DNA, Protein enzymes, fats, cells, etc. would be needed for survival
30 - There is not the remotest possibility life could originate by itself. There is not enough time and space in all the universe and in all eternity to product our present myriad of living species on earth
"It is the sheer universality of perfection, the fact that everywhere we look, to whatever depth we look, we find an elegance and ingenuity of an absolutely transcending quality, which so mitigates against the idea of chance.
Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest elements of which - a functional protein or gene - is complex beyond our own creative capacities, a reality which is the very antithesis of chance, which excels in every sense anything produced by the intelligence of man?"
--Agnostic, non-creationist, Dr. Michael Denton
You are correct Dr. Denton that is why intelligent design is replacing evolutionary theory.
Lets start simple.
0: None of these reasons are scientific or based on science.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
1 - Spontaneous generation has been scientifically disproved.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
2 - Instant success would have to be necessary for the life form to survive.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
3 - Thousands of essential body parts and thousands more of essential chemical compounds would have to instantly form themselves
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
4 - Both male and female forms would need to make themselves and be near each other in space and time
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
5 - Law of mass action would immediately destroy chemical compounds
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
6 - Water is never enough to produce life chemicals
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
7 - There is no lab equipment out in nature
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
8 - Condensation problem: Water must be carefully removed for fats, sugars, and nucleic acids to derive out of protein
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
9 - Precipitation problem: Enzymes would immediately be destroyed
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
10 - Most life chemicals not found in watery environment
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
11 - Lightning bolts only damage and kill and could not be the energy source
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
12 - Oxygen problem: Life could not originate where there is oxygen
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
13 - Life could not survive without continual oxygen
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
14 - Oxidized iron is found in rocks existing where life is said to have originated
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveNot true. Many species live in deoxygenated environments. Archea come to mind. Oxygen is required for water though.(Ali 13 : JIA 2)
15 - Life can not originate without water. But there can be no water without oxygen
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
16 - A reducing atmosphere (no oxygen) would produce life-killing peroxides
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
17 - Ultraviolet light in reducing atmosphere would immediately kill life
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
18 - Without oxygen, there would be no protective ozone layer
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
19 - Proteins would immediately hydrolyze and destroy themselves
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive.
20 - There would not be enough chemicals available to form even the simplest protein
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
21 - Nitrogen is in most biochemicals, but there is not enough concentrated nitrogen in nature to form life
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveUmmm...yes there is. Look in the soil. (Ali 20 : JIA 2)
22 - There is not enough available phosporus in nature either
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveDoes that mean god did it. No. Actually we do know how to make fatty acids. We watch cells do it all the time.(Ali 21 : JIA 2)
23 - Scientists have no idea how to make fatty acids or how they could make themselves
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
24 - The atmosphere throughout the world would have to instantly change from no oxygen to its present oxygen-rich content
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
25 - Extremely complicated chemical combinations not found in nonliving material exist in living tissue
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
26 - Residue problem: Since such extremely rich chemical mixtures are found in living things, we should find residues of them in nature, but they do not exist
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
27 - Accidental formations of amino acids would produce equal amounts of left- and right-handed forms which exist in animal life
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
28 - Dissolution problem: Even if correct chemicals gather together, the next instant they would spontaneously disintegrate by forming with other chemicals
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
29 - Immediate, complete duplication and reproduction of DNA, Protein enzymes, fats, cells, etc. would be needed for survival
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
30 - There is not the remotest possibility life could originate by itself. There is not enough time and space in all the universe and in all eternity to product our present myriad of living species on earth
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
My favorite part about this is that you actually got four points because the statements you made were correct and SUPPORT the current scientific model. (So really the score is Alliance 30: JIA 0).
My other favorite part is that NONE of the chemical principles cited in that list were used appropriately, so clearly this was written by some uneducated schmuck that you used because you don’t have any knowledge on the points themselves, much less the ability to properly discern credible sources.
Originally posted by Alliance
Lets start simple.0: None of these reasons are scientific or based on science.
Quite correct! They only people who believe in the spontaneous generation of life are creationsists. (Ali 0 : JIA 1)
No. Viruses and Prions behave like living object, but are not. There is direct evidence for a transition phase between non-life and life. (Ali 1 : JIA 1)
Thats not correct, all body pathways are not well constructed, overlap, and have little ins and outs. Over time, new pathways develop and become advantageous. Bacteria are amazingly simple and have no body parts. most utilize differnet chimical compounds and the removal of any one of these often does not kill the cell. (Ali 2 : JIA 1)
No, a grat portion of species engage in asexual reproduction. There is no need for male and female. There are also species that change gender over there lifetime. Sexual reporduction did not jsut occour one day. (Ali 3 : JIA 1)
The Law of mass action states that "The rate of a chemical reaction is directly proportional to the product of the effective concentrations of each participating molecule." Therfore, this theory has no logical connection to the instantaneous destruction of chemicla compounds.(Ali 4 : JIA 1)
Yeah. There are thousands of other readily available elements and compounds in nature.(Ali 4 : JIA 2)
So? Whats the point? There’s not an ice cream cone in my pants either.(Ali 5 : JIA 2)
Water is not “removed.” It is a byproduct of condensation reactions and proteins are easily capable of this.(Ali 6 : JIA 2)
Precipitation doesn’t destroy anything and most enzymes are extensively soluble in aqueous environments. (Ali 7 : JIA 2)
Not true. Most are. Salts, ions, all necessary elements. (Ali 8 : JIA 2)
Not true. Lightning might kill a living thing, but it doesn’t kill chemicals. (Ali 9 : JIA 2)
Not true. Many species live in deoxygenated environments. Archea come to mind. (Ali 10 : JIA 2)
Not true. Many species live in deoxygenated environments. Archea come to mind. (Ali 11 : JIA 2)
So? Oxidized iron is also found in your body.(Ali 12 : JIA 2)
Not true. Many species live in deoxygenated environments. Archea come to mind. Oxygen is required for water though.(Ali 13 : JIA 2)No, peroxides are also contained in cells. Peroxisomes come to mind. What’s your point? Many species can live in highly acidic environments. (Ali 14 : JIA 2)
Ummm...no? Where are you pulling this cr@p from? (Ali 15 : JIA 2)
No O2. Life develops. Life produces O2. Ozone layer forms. Problems: None. (Ali 16 : JIA 2)
No. Proteins are very specific for substrates and very few proteins hydrolyze proteins.(Ali 17 : JIA 2)
.
Not true. All the required pieces are there. (Ali 18 : JIA 2)Hello. Air is 78% nitrogen. Not to mention all the hypothesized NH3 gas in the atmosphere during the time when life formed and the nitrogen in the soil and water. (Ali 19 : JIA 2)
Ummm...yes there is. Look in the soil. (Ali 20 : JIA 2)
Does that mean god did it. No. Actually we do know how to make fatty acids. We watch cells do it all the time.(Ali 21 : JIA 2)No. It didn’t. It changed gradually over time in response to oxygen producing life. (Ali 21 : JIA 3)
Yes. And there are direct mechanism for making those conditions. (Ali 21 : JIA 4)
These residues are manufactured by cells. (Ali 22 : JIA 4)
VERY WRONG. Stars produce many organic compounds, among them amino acids. Almost all are L-form. Therefore it makes sense that most of life uses L-form Aas. (Ali 23 : JIA 4)
No. Dissolution means dissolving in a liquid. It has nothing to do with direct chemical reactions. (Ali 24 : JIA 4)
No. As I’ve already said, virus and prions are not alive, but have some machinery. Not everything has to evolve simultaneously. That’s why there is an (Cambrian) explosion of life. All the little stuff gets worked out over a LONG period of time. One a pretty solid model is in place, life explodes. (Ali 25 : JIA 4)
No. Natural selection explains this process quite well and has been both directly and indirectly observed for centuries. (Ali 26 : JIA 4)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
My favorite part about this is that you actually got four points because the statements you made were correct and SUPPORT the current scientific model. (So really the score is Alliance 30: JIA 0).
My other favorite part is that NONE of the chemical principles cited in that list were used appropriately, so clearly this was written by some uneducated schmuck that you used because you don’t have any knowledge on the points themselves, much less the ability to properly discern credible sources.
Originally posted by Alliance
Quite correct! They only people who believe in the spontaneous generation of life are creationsists.No. Viruses and Prions behave like living object, but are not. There is direct evidence for a transition phase between non-life and life.
No, a grat portion of species engage in asexual reproduction. There is no need for male and female. There are also species that change gender over there lifetime. Sexual reporduction did not jsut occour one day.
No. Dissolution means dissolving in a liquid. It has nothing to do with direct chemical reactions.
No. As I’ve already said, virus and prions are not alive, but have some machinery. Not everything has to evolve simultaneously. That’s why there is an (Cambrian) explosion of life. All the little stuff gets worked out over a LONG period of time. One a pretty solid model is in place, life explodes.
2) The evolution of sexual reproduction is unexplainable as far as I know. One would have to produce a female part of the genetic material and the other the male. This would not randomly occur in organisms that had previously reproduced asexually. They would then have to produce many offspring for one to survive and reproduce as well.
3) The formation of genetic material is extremely unlikely do to the reactivity of the substances present within living things. These chemicals would far more readily react with other substances present in the environment.
4) But, once again, prions and viruses cannot proliferate on their own.
Originally posted by lord xyz
"Instant success would have to be necessary for the life form to survive."Obviously was never taught physics. Chemical reactions are instant success. Out of all the possible ways for Sodium and Chlorine to bond, it only happens once, at an instant.
Not all chemical reactions are instant some take time.