Darwinism

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Quaxar:

Uh, uh, I want to get in on this too!
What? I'm snowed in here and it's between uni semesters. I'm totally under-biologied.

If you're so certain then please present these flaws because apparently nobody who actually studied in the field of Biology is educated enough to realize it.

SUP biology BRO :D

I too am not studying at uni at the moment. Im reading this at the moment on my required reading list :3

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Molecular-Biology-Cell-Bruce-Alberts/dp/0815341067/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1360618513&sr=1-1

How goes your studies? I remember your awesome insights from the last evolution thread. This poor guy tho. Hes being bombarded, even though we had another creationist earlier in the thread :P How can he even compete with a HOARD of biologists XD

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

can you tell who coded evolution rules - yes there are rules
and how on earth matter become existince and
how on earth matter become living organizm
and why that first living organizm did not stay that way while could live his life in happiness
or why do we still have single cell organizms
and goes forever

I can answer this.

1. What rules? You mean the laws of physics? Im not sure. I think they have always been and will be.

That answer sort of stumbles into the "ex nihilo nihil fit" problem, though.
(Nothing comes out of nothing)

MonsterMMORPG:

i know my answer pointless to you but still i will

1 - yes there are rules since creation :) and the creator created those rules
2 - yes big bang done by the Creator and there are proofs in the Quran that indicates that : http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
3 - wow just wow :) matter becomes living thing with DNA that is far more supeior than current technology :)

I dont know what created them. Im not sure it was a creator. I dont have any reason to think so.

Still no idea really, i dont like guessing. I dont want a book. I want test results. I know the Quran exists. I just dont value it over any other book. Or A guide to keeping fishes. The Quran cant prove the Quran.

3. Yeah you can create random DNA nucleotides in a lab with current technology. Its random though. Utterly random DNA. The chance part is that it came together in a short sequences by chance that code for itself. Once you get something that can replicate using the environment youre well on your way toward life.

Realitycrash:

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

can you tell who coded evolution rules - yes there are rules
and how on earth matter become existince and
how on earth matter become living organizm
and why that first living organizm did not stay that way while could live his life in happiness
or why do we still have single cell organizms
and goes forever

I can answer this.

1. What rules? You mean the laws of physics? Im not sure. I think they have always been and will be.

That answer sort of stumbles into the "ex nihilo nihil fit" problem, though.
(Nothing comes out of nothing)

I know. I think creation is innately paradoxical no matter how many gods you throw into the mix. The moment you claim something always has existed you admit the chain can be shortened using "Stuff can ALWAYS exist" to what is observed. My HONEST answer is i have no idea. Im leaning toward what you quoted though. It is a problem and always will be because its a paradox that things can exist. You can always go "But what made that".

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

i know my answer pointless to you but still i will

1 - yes there are rules since creation :) and the creator created those rules
2 - yes big bang done by the Creator and there are proofs in the Quran that indicates that : http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
3 - wow just wow :) matter becomes living thing with DNA that is far more supeior than current technology :)

I dont know what created them. Im not sure it was a creator. I dont have any reason to think so.

Still no idea really, i dont like guessing. I dont want a book. I want test results. I know the Quran exists. I just dont value it over any other book. Or A guide to keeping fishes. The Quran cant prove the Quran.

3. Yeah you can create random DNA nucleotides in a lab with current technology. Its random though. Utterly random DNA. The chance part is that it came together in a short sequences by chance that code for itself. Once you get something that can replicate using the environment youre well on your way toward life.

we created dna really ? dna already exists there bro. you are just trying to replicate clone whatever you call it. try to create that you never saw or not exits and you will fail
you can not even imagine something not based on the things you know. because humans or any living things does not have creation power

and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

MonsterMMORPG:

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

i know my answer pointless to you but still i will

1 - yes there are rules since creation :) and the creator created those rules
2 - yes big bang done by the Creator and there are proofs in the Quran that indicates that : http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
3 - wow just wow :) matter becomes living thing with DNA that is far more supeior than current technology :)

I dont know what created them. Im not sure it was a creator. I dont have any reason to think so.

Still no idea really, i dont like guessing. I dont want a book. I want test results. I know the Quran exists. I just dont value it over any other book. Or A guide to keeping fishes. The Quran cant prove the Quran.

3. Yeah you can create random DNA nucleotides in a lab with current technology. Its random though. Utterly random DNA. The chance part is that it came together in a short sequences by chance that code for itself. Once you get something that can replicate using the environment youre well on your way toward life.

we created dna really ? dna already exists there bro. you are just trying to replicate clone whatever you call it. try to create that you never saw or not exits and you will fail
you can not even imagine something not based on the things you know. because humans or any living things does not have creation power

and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

No, he said that we CAN create DNA in a lab. Not that we (as in 'humans') created DNA the very first time. That would be quite paradoxical.

Realitycrash:

MonsterMMORPG:

BiscuitTrouser:

I dont know what created them. Im not sure it was a creator. I dont have any reason to think so.

Still no idea really, i dont like guessing. I dont want a book. I want test results. I know the Quran exists. I just dont value it over any other book. Or A guide to keeping fishes. The Quran cant prove the Quran.

3. Yeah you can create random DNA nucleotides in a lab with current technology. Its random though. Utterly random DNA. The chance part is that it came together in a short sequences by chance that code for itself. Once you get something that can replicate using the environment youre well on your way toward life.

we created dna really ? dna already exists there bro. you are just trying to replicate clone whatever you call it. try to create that you never saw or not exits and you will fail
you can not even imagine something not based on the things you know. because humans or any living things does not have creation power

and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

No, he said that we CAN create DNA in a lab. Not that we (as in 'humans') created DNA the very first time. That would be quite paradoxical.

no i got what he said :)

MonsterMMORPG:

1 - yes there are rules since creation :) and the creator created those rules
2 - yes big bang done by the Creator and there are proofs in the Quran that indicates that : http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
3 - wow just wow :) matter becomes living thing with DNA that is far more supeior than current technology :)

1) What proves that? And who created the creator?
2) I sure ain't gonna click on all those sublinks
3) What does that even mean "DNA that is far superior than current technology?". Technology is used to create DNA, you can't compare technology (which is an abstract concept to begin with) with DNA. That makes no sense.

MonsterMMORPG:

we created dna really ? dna already exists there bro. you are just trying to replicate clone whatever you call it. try to create that you never saw or not exits and you will fail
you can not even imagine something not based on the things you know. because humans or any living things does not have creation power

and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

We made DNA, by chance, by throwing together what was in the world when it was meant to be created and leaving it. DNA just formed in the test tubes. We didnt use any previous DNA. We didnt need to see DNA to create it in these tubes. All we needed to do was make the conditions the same and leave it. Its amazing. It happened by chance right there in the lab. Information and all.

BiscuitTrouser:

Realitycrash:

BiscuitTrouser:

I can answer this.

1. What rules? You mean the laws of physics? Im not sure. I think they have always been and will be.

That answer sort of stumbles into the "ex nihilo nihil fit" problem, though.
(Nothing comes out of nothing)

I know. I think creation is innately paradoxical no matter how many gods you throw into the mix. The moment you claim something always has existed you admit the chain can be shortened using "Stuff can ALWAYS exist" to what is observed. My HONEST answer is i have no idea. Im leaning toward what you quoted though. It is a problem and always will be because its a paradox that things can exist. You can always go "But what made that".

Which is why I think that on at least this issue, Religion and 'Science' stands on equal grounds. For any answer 'Science' can give me here is about as appetizing as any answer Religion can.
Unless we have a scientific-revolution, 'I don't know' will always be the go-to answer.

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

we created dna really ? dna already exists there bro. you are just trying to replicate clone whatever you call it. try to create that you never saw or not exits and you will fail
you can not even imagine something not based on the things you know. because humans or any living things does not have creation power

and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

We made DNA, by chance, by throwing together what was in the world when it was meant to be created and leaving it. DNA just formed in the test tubes. We didnt use any previous DNA. We didnt need to see DNA to create it in these tubes. All we needed to do was make the conditions the same and leave it. Its amazing. It happened by chance right there in the lab. Information and all.

hahaahaha

you threw what was in the world randomly and created dna and you really believe that :)

anyway really really pointless stuff going on here :) i am out. people that believe can create things with just throwing things randomly around ^^

@Gone Gonzo if the creator were created, he would not be the creator
you need to understand logically that this amazing order can not become real with just chance. after you realized that you can search religions and find the correct one. because created did not just crated and throw us randomly on earth and left us :)

Realitycrash:

Which is why I think that on at least this issue, Religion and 'Science' stands on equal grounds. For any answer 'Science' can give me here is about as appetizing as any answer Religion can.
Unless we have a scientific-revolution, 'I don't know' will always be the go-to answer.

Well the scientific stance at the moment is "Need more data" so its not really on the same stance right now to be fair. I dont know is truly the best answer we have.

MonsterMMORPG:

you need to understand logically that this amazing order can not become real with just chance. after you realized that you can search religions and find the correct one. because created did not just crated and throw us randomly on earth and left us :)

You need to stop using the word 'logically' and we will be fine.
Logic does not work that way.

MonsterMMORPG:

hahaahaha

you threw what was in the world randomly and created dna and you really believe that :)

anyway really really pointless stuff going on here :) i am out. people that believe can create things with just throwing things randomly around ^^

I dont believe it... it actually happened. If you click my wiki link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

You can see the apparatus used. Theres some electricity and heat. Some water. And the gases. Thats it. No guiding hand. No old DNA. No use of what DNA looks like. All in a system of tubes. They came together and DNA was in the tubes that came out. Seriously. It happened. I dont need to guess or believe. Because it happened in a lab. Yeah we did. We threw what was in the world around the time life arose and DNA was the result. Crazy huh. But thats what happened.

It wasnt thrown randomly around. It was put in a system identical to how the world used to be. And THEN it happened randomly. Particles react. Thats random. Sometimes they make structures like DNA. Also random. Totally happens dude.

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

hahaahaha

you threw what was in the world randomly and created dna and you really believe that :)

anyway really really pointless stuff going on here :) i am out. people that believe can create things with just throwing things randomly around ^^

I dont believe it... it actually happened. If you click my wiki link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

You can see the apparatus used. Theres some electricity and heat. Some water. And the gases. Thats it. No guiding hand. No old DNA. No use of what DNA looks like. All in a system of tubes. They came together and DNA was in the tubes that came out. Seriously. It happened. I dont need to guess or believe. Because it happened in a lab. Yeah we did. We threw what was in the world around the time life arose and DNA was the result. Crazy huh. But thats what happened.

It wasnt thrown randomly around. It was put in a system identical to how the world used to be. And THEN it happened randomly. Particles react. Thats random. Sometimes they make structures like DNA. Also random. Totally happens dude.

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

MonsterMMORPG:

hahaahaha

you threw what was in the world randomly and created dna and you really believe that :)

anyway really really pointless stuff going on here :) i am out. people that believe can create things with just throwing things randomly around ^^

@Gone Gonzo if the creator were created, he would not be the creator
you need to understand logically that this amazing order can not become real with just chance. after you realized that you can search religions and find the correct one. because created did not just crated and throw us randomly on earth and left us :)

What logic are you talking about? I don't see any reason why "logic" would dictate the necessity of a creator.

MonsterMMORPG:

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

Despite wiki having its flaws i'm convinced wiki is more factually correct than any religious books.

MonsterMMORPG:

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

Wonderful thing about wikipedia: they cite their sources at the bottom of the page. I'd fully encourage you to check the sources directly.

MonsterMMORPG:

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

Wikipedia just made a lovely simplification for you. If you would like the actual academic journal here it is:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/130/3370/245

Heres the apparatus

http://www.dmns.org/science/museum-scientists/david-grinspoon/funky-science-wonder-lab/research-updates/astrobiology-collection-miller-urey-apparatus

In the museum along with the published results.

Its a very useful and often cited paper.

If you wish to earn 10000 dollars you could always recreate the EXACT scenario they made and show it DOESNT produce anything. Anyone can. And win a nobel prize. Amazingly as of yet no one has.

BiscuitTrouser:

SUP biology BRO :D

I too am not studying at uni at the moment. Im reading this at the moment on my required reading list :3

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Molecular-Biology-Cell-Bruce-Alberts/dp/0815341067/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1360618513&sr=1-1

How goes your studies? I remember your awesome insights from the last evolution thread. This poor guy tho. Hes being bombarded, even though we had another creationist earlier in the thread :P How can he even compete with a HOARD of biologists XD

I enjoyed that Evolution thread. You rarely get to discuss Creationism beyond the monkey conundrum, it's nice to have some challenge and while he kind of got me on my initial chromosome 2 point I like to think I made up for it in viral genetic remnants and illogical design examples.

I thought about getting that book but then I already had bought the big Campbell and iGenetics and that would have bombed my budget. I get kind of carried away buying books...

Studies are good so far, though I'm a bit bummed that they put me on the waiting list for my organic chemistry exam. Missing that means not being able to get into next semester's chemical practice course which might be hindering me taking some microbiology and genetics courses. But anyway, looks like they are already working on a second date.
How's yours?

MonsterMMORPG:

Quaxar:

MonsterMMORPG:
what ever you say
there are extreme flaws in the theory that you can never answer

also i have countless scientific proofs that proves God existince
and if you are so blind to see these proofs nothing can be done :(

even just looking to human biology is enough to understand there must be some superior power

Uh, uh, I want to get in on this too!
What? I'm snowed in here and it's between uni semesters. I'm totally under-biologied.

If you're so certain then please present these flaws because apparently nobody who actually studied in the field of Biology is educated enough to realize it.

all of the science itself

the created rules, things everything

they are far more superior than our technology

science is nothing but understand the laws that is already created

we just discover them

Yeah, gonna need a little more on this. You're not even remotely trying to point out flaws in the Theory of Evolution, which I could appreciate, you are randomly asserting things.
Science is understanding the existing universe, true. However, I fail to see how that leads to Creationism.
But thanks for that Quran link, I hadn't known a Muslim version of answersingenesis yet.

BiscuitTrouser:

MonsterMMORPG:

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

Wikipedia just made a lovely simplification for you. If you would like the actual academic journal here it is:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/130/3370/245

Heres the apparatus

http://www.dmns.org/science/museum-scientists/david-grinspoon/funky-science-wonder-lab/research-updates/astrobiology-collection-miller-urey-apparatus

In the museum along with the published results.

Its a very useful and often cited paper.

If you wish to earn 10000 dollars you could always recreate the EXACT scenario they made and show it DOESNT produce anything. Anyone can. And win a nobel prize. Amazingly as of yet no one has.

If you win a nobel prize, you are going to win a lot more money than just 10.000 dollars..

Anyway: I've read about that experiment. Problem is that it only creates very simple DNA-strings, as far as I have read. And we have failed to manage to coax them into bonding together to create anything more advanced.

Realitycrash:

If you win a nobel prize, you are going to win a lot more money than just 10.000 dollars..

Anyway: I've read about that experiment. Problem is that it only creates very simple DNA-strings, as far as I have read. And we have failed to manage to coax them into bonding together to create anything more advanced.

I missed some zeros.

Yeah its a cool experiment. Obviously it took MILLIONS of years for this to happen. So the lab experiment that took 50 years to produce some DNA wont be making life anytime soon, we just dont have the time. Its promising though. Super promising.

Quaxar:

I enjoyed that Evolution thread. You rarely get to discuss Creationism beyond the monkey conundrum, it's nice to have some challenge and while he kind of got me on my initial chromosome 2 point I like to think I made up for it in viral genetic remnants and illogical design examples.

I thought about getting that book but then I already had bought the big Campbell and iGenetics and that would have bombed my budget. I get kind of carried away buying books...

Studies are good so far, though I'm a bit bummed that they put me on the waiting list for my organic chemistry exam. Missing that means not being able to get into next semester's chemical practice course which might be hindering me taking some microbiology and genetics courses. But anyway, looks like they are already working on a second date.
How's yours?

The viral vestigial DNA proof is one of my favourites. Its so tidy and logical and rather easy to follow once you understand the principle. Was a fun thread.

Yeah these books are far more expensive than i anticipated, my budget wasnt large enough when i first allocated all my money around.

At the moment im just in my gap year im starting in 6 months but honestly i cant help myself from combing articles online and my textbook for stuff. Its just so awesome. R science has become my haunt on reddit. Im pretty happy with it, i need to compete hard for my placement year so im trying to give myself an edge in the first year where it decides it. A year in industry is really important to me. Did you sign up for that?

BiscuitTrouser:
At the moment im just in my gap year im starting in 6 months but honestly i cant help myself from combing articles online and my textbook for stuff. Its just so awesome. R science has become my haunt on reddit. Im pretty happy with it, i need to compete hard for my placement year so im trying to give myself an edge in the first year where it decides it. A year in industry is really important to me. Did you sign up for that?

A whole year in the industry? There's lab assistant positions as summer jobs I know about, I haven't actually considered doing full-time lab work before my BSc yet. But anyway, I think I still got some time left for that, gotta first figure out where my focus is going to be.

Also, in reference to the former post

How can he even compete with a HOARD of biologists XD

I think we need a proper collective noun for biologists. I suggest "a study of biologists". Although that might lead to confusions in papers... eh, still in development.

MonsterMMORPG:
and if you really believe that dna can become real from matter with just chance i don't know what to tell you

did you know that 1 gram dna can hold 1 million DVD disks information :)

Just an FYI for readers here: Harvard cracks DNA storage, crams 700 terabytes of data into a single gram
This is a human-made scale and a not really practical at that. Actual DNA doesn't hold nearly as much information due to huge areas solely dedicated as promotor regions for gene expression, nonsense DNA that doesn't get expressed, viral remnants, etc. Not getting into the specifics but suffice to say actual human DNA is about 50% "other", things that have no or little use.

Now let's not pretend like DNA is some kind of inexplicable miracle thing. What is DNA actually?
It is a compound of a base (guanine, adenine, thymine, cytosine), bound to a ribose (a 5 carbon sugar), connected with each other through a phosphorus. Through atomic bonding it naturally forms a solid ribose-phosphate spine to build a single strand, pointing the bases into the middle where they interact with each other through extremely weak hydrogen bonds. Helical bending is mainly achieved due to the chemical properties of the bases which is also why there are several distinctly different forms a DNA helix can have.

The 4 bases are simple carbon rings, a structure the highly reactive carbon is prone to form on its own, with some nitrogen filling in at places. The ribose is again a carbon ring with a lot of OH groups and the rest is one phorphorus with 4 oxygen bonded to it.
For an A in your DNA it's altogether 15 hydrogen, 10 carbons, 8 oxygens, 5 nitrogen and a phorphorus if I didn't miscalculate. The other nucleotides aren't that different. Nothing out of the ordinary, all very abundant elements in the universe, easy to find from every bigger star. And all of these components are energetically favored atomic arrangements given the right starting conditions.
Could it be a supernatural being created the laws of chemistry? I personally find that silly but on the other hand I do not care enough to argue against this point, I prefer to challenge religion with a comparative and philosophical approach. But I do enjoy defending the field of Biology and if you've got actual points against Evolution I'd love to hear them.

And finally, I'd just like to point you to an older thread where we had some very good points against Creationism with at least 4 participating biologists or students thereof, if you're interested.

Glasgow:

LoFr3Eq:
Hardly anyone is a "Darwinist", trying to accuse someone of being one just makes you look silly.

And one does not have faith in evolution, it is a fact, verifiably so.

Is it silly to call someone a Marxist then?

Evolution isn't fact. Evolution is a theory. Facts are data.

Gravity is also a theory, for example. A theory is a very important tool in science as it allows us to predict outcomes of certain events based on the theory itself. Facts only serves to note the happening at a certain moment or length of time. They can't predict jack. A fact is that my pencil just dropped a second ago from my desk. The theory of gravity dictates that when my pencil was about to fall from a height of 1 meter, it's potential height energy was... blah blah blah... which would have the pencil drop at a speed of... and then the time it takes for the pencil to hit the ground is...

So yes, you have faith in the theory of Evolution because it's a pretty good one and we haven't had a lot of competent competition for the past few decades.

Actually that is a common but major misconception, one I've tried to correct several times. A law is an observable phenomenon that has been determined to be an undeniable truth to the best of our ability. A scientific theory is a collection of facts and hypotheses that attempt to explain how or and/or why an observable phenomenon occurs

There is the law of gravity, which states that objects of mass exert an attractive force on each other based on mass and distance, then there is the theory of gravity, which attempts to explain how this attractive force works.

Similarly, there is the law of evolution, which states that species change over time, a process we have indeed observed, and the theory of evolution, which attempts to explain how this occurs.

Would it surprise you to know that the latter has far MORE evidence for it than the former?

And generally speaking, Marxism refers to absolute faith in the referenced political system, said system remains largely the same in spite of failures and contradictions. There is no comparable unchanging creed associated with Darwin. The theory has grown and changed considerably since his time.

MonsterMMORPG:

BiscuitTrouser:

I dont believe it... it actually happened. If you click my wiki link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

You can see the apparatus used. Theres some electricity and heat. Some water. And the gases. Thats it. No guiding hand. No old DNA. No use of what DNA looks like. All in a system of tubes. They came together and DNA was in the tubes that came out. Seriously. It happened. I dont need to guess or believe. Because it happened in a lab. Yeah we did. We threw what was in the world around the time life arose and DNA was the result. Crazy huh. But thats what happened.

It wasnt thrown randomly around. It was put in a system identical to how the world used to be. And THEN it happened randomly. Particles react. Thats random. Sometimes they make structures like DNA. Also random. Totally happens dude.

ye since it just writes on wikipedia it happened :)

The Miller-Urey experiment has been well documented in multiple sources other than wikipedia. Hell, I learned about it before wikipedia had been invented.

The experiment had multiple issues, but it did prove one thing, that under conditions at least relatively similar to that of early earth, the basic building blocks of DNA can and do form spontaneously, without interference from outside agents. I suppose you could contend that god did it, but that would appear to be a nonsensical move to make.

If I was being pedantic over definitions I would say that Darwinist could exist. They would be people who adhere exclusively to the works of Charles Darwin and do not accept any of the advances on his works or evidences that he, himself, was not aware of. But they would not be the same as those who accept the Theory of Evolution as it stands today.

Wow, things got weird (and calmed down again) fast in this thread. Kind of unsure whether I'm glad or disappointed I missed it.

BiscuitTrouser:

We made DNA, by chance, by throwing together what was in the world when it was meant to be created and leaving it. DNA just formed in the test tubes. We didnt use any previous DNA. We didnt need to see DNA to create it in these tubes. All we needed to do was make the conditions the same and leave it. Its amazing. It happened by chance right there in the lab. Information and all.

I never liked calling it chance. Seems more like a statistical inevitability to me.

Heronblade:
The Miller-Urey experiment has been well documented in multiple sources other than wikipedia. Hell, I learned about it before wikipedia had been invented.

The experiment had multiple issues, but it did prove one thing, that under conditions at least relatively similar to that of early earth, the basic building blocks of DNA can and do form spontaneously, without interference from outside agents. I suppose you could contend that god did it, but that would appear to be a nonsensical move to make.

[/quote]

I just want to pile on and state that the Urey-Miller experiment was actually upstaged a few years later. In Juan Oro's experiment a few years later, he created what is thought to be a better model of early earth, and if I'm not mistaken, he found amino acids AND the nucleotide adenine, one of the four bases od DNA, the others being Thymine, Cystosine, and Guanine.

The question is, when you pour milk on your cereal each morning, are you identifying as a Pasteurist?

MarsAtlas:

I just want to pile on and state that the Urey-Miller experiment was actually upstaged a few years later. In Juan Oro's experiment a few years later, he created what is thought to be a better model of early earth, and if I'm not mistaken, he found amino acids AND the nucleotide adenine, one of the four bases of DNA, the others being Thymine, Cystosine, and Guanine.

I said it created DNA and realised at a later date the Urey Miller experiment wasnt the one that did that, unfortunately the name of what DID escaped me. Thanks for the reminder!

LetalisK:
I never liked calling it chance. Seems more like a statistical inevitability to me.

True. I always like linking this image when people say that the chance of all this happening is too low. Someone made a gif of it but i cant find it :C It shows JUST how tiny a portion of the sky this image is.

Whats ridiculous is rolling a billion sided dice 1000 billion times and thinking its never going to roll a 1. EVERY single planet in EVERY single galaxy in that picture is part of the dice role. And that picture was a VERY zoomed in minuscule square of our nights sky with a high exposure camera.

BiscuitTrouser:
True. I always like linking this image when people say that the chance of all this happening is too low. Someone made a gif of it but i cant find it :C It shows JUST how tiny a portion of the sky this image is.

Whats ridiculous is rolling a billion sided dice 1000 billion times and thinking its never going to roll a 1. EVERY single planet in EVERY single galaxy in that picture is part of the dice role. And that picture was a VERY zoomed in minuscule square of our nights sky with a high exposure camera.

And then you have to multiply that inconceivable number of planets by the inconceivable amount of time that has passed as well as the size of each planet in comparison to the size of complex molecules. The number of trials is just so incredibly huge. It's geological time multiplied by geographical area multiplied by astronomical numbers and then multiplied by molecular densities. So huge!

Skeleon:
Wow, things got weird (and calmed down again) fast in this thread. Kind of unsure whether I'm glad or disappointed I missed it.

I was sort of hoping you'd chime in, with your medical profession and all.

Heronblade:
Actually that is a common but major misconception, one I've tried to correct several times. A law is an observable phenomenon that has been determined to be an undeniable truth to the best of our ability.

And this is where extreme skeptics get pissy and go all Problem of Induction.
'Blah blah blah Best of our Ability doesn't mean it is 'true', because we could be viewing things differently and have a different 'best of our ability' blah blah blah'.
Ugh. Why does it never end..

MonsterMMORPG:
what ever you say
there are extreme flaws in the theory that you can never answer

also i have countless scientific proofs that proves God existince
and if you are so blind to see these proofs nothing can be done :(

even just looking to human biology is enough to understand there must be some superior power

You mean like our superior teeth that are horribly unprepared to deal with our starch-heavy diet?
Mabey our knees that get worn out after a few decades?
Or our slim hips and large heads that make giving birth extremly painfull and sometimes fatal?
And let's not forget that men lack backups on our last pair of chromosomes, or that we even need backups?

The human body, biology, is full of flaws and inefficient designs.
That creator must be a bit of an amature.

(and all of these flaws can and have been explained by biologists, by the way)

BiscuitTrouser:
pic snip

Isn't that the picture that takes up the size of FDR's eye from a dime if you hold it at arm's length toward the sky?

LetalisK:

BiscuitTrouser:
pic snip

Isn't that the picture that takes up the size of FDR's eye from a dime if you hold it at arm's length toward the sky?

Yep, the image i saw used that comparison, if you hold the dime over the moon so that they match in size you find that the square that the hubble zoomed in on is about the size of his eye, allowing for the square shape of the image of course. Spectacular isnt it. Its CRAZY how small we are. So very crazy. Its fair enough being told there are 1000000000 planets but that number is meaningless until you start seeing the pictures. If you like that, try this app out:

http://media.skysurvey.org/interactive360/index.html

Great fun.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked