• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Common ground Creationists and Atheists "can" agree with - without too much effort

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It doesn't really beg the question of an assembler or a designer though.

If there is an "observation" that a sufficiently large pile of rocks would self assemble into a combination that turns itself into a horse over time.. then that lab experiment needs to be posted.

Wait! Don't tell me "everything is a silly point if it does not favor evolution"

Silly strawman aside, there is nothing stopping you from reading up on all of the last 150 years of combined evolution and abiogenesis research.

So then "Something in there would 'have an answer' to my point" ? Is that a "faith statement" on your part?

I'm not following your questions here.

I am questioning your apparent claim that something in their would answer the point I raised. .I am pointing out that since you point to nothing that does that - this leads us to assume you are simply "hoping" something will exist that does it without actually having that on hand.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Hood was a loser.
Mar 11, 2017
21,610
16,306
55
USA
✟410,204.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
As we learned from observations of 50,000 generations of bacteria - they can't even turn themselves into eukaryotes.

And exactly how could they?

As we've noted before, the origin of the eukaryotes was the symbiotic envelopment of one single-celled organism by another.

In these "50,000-generation" bacterial evolution experiments the bacteria are a MONOCULTURE. (For example, all E. coli.) There *aren't* any other types of microorganisms to envelop. Your are literally asking why the impossible to happen.
 
Reactions: pitabread
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
How much reading on contemporary abiogenesis research have you undertaken lately?

My proposal is that a pile of rocks - no matter how high you pile them would not have the ability to turn into a horse no would they acquire it over time.

Lab experiments showing piles of rocks able to self-organize into horse-producing units would be of interest.

I think we all know who does not have one.

In fact we don't even have experiments of bacteria turning into eukaryotes - let alone rocks turning into horses or turning into bacteria
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private

It's always funny to me when creationists complain about the fact that some bacteria cultures in lab beakers haven't done in 20 years what an entire ecosystem accomplished in 4 billion years.

Almost like they're not even remotely the same scope or scale...
 
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Not the "property". And I see that you still do not understand how science is done.

Let's have a discussion on the scientific method. It will help you debate better.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private

Why are you still responding to one post with multiple posts? There is no reason to do that. Just put all your responses in a single post.

Learn how to forum, dude.


Duh. It's a bit stupid to ask for a single lab experiment to collectively demonstrate an entire 4 billion years of abiogenesis + biological evolution.

All this really demonstrates is your over-reliance on strawman caricatures of the history of life on this planet. This does not help your position.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married

There is no "ecosystem" that will turn rocks into a horse or into bacteria.

And "observations in real life" show that bacteria do not even turn into eukaryotes much less horses over time.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
BobRyan said:
And is "observed" over 50,000 generations (more than all of human evolution) - to NOT even make it to eukaryote

And obviously - that is a point that no one has been able to refute so far - other than the one evolutionist here arguing that if such a jump ever did happen we should never expect it to happen again ..

Repeating failed arguments is simply one acknowledging that one is wrong.
.

I have been trying to point that out to you -- are you on board with it now?
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
There is no "ecosystem" that will turn rocks into a horse or into bacteria.

So at this point do you have anything beyond blind assertions and strawman caricatures of biological evolution?

Or is this it?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Please do not accuse others of your faults. I paid attention to the details. I doubt if you have.
We can all agree that there was an "abiogenesis event". In other words at one point there was no life and then later there was. We all agree that evolution is possible.

If one goes by a strict definition of abiogenesis I still have two possibilities. But the fact is that the most reasonable answer and only answer supported by evidence is abiogenesis.

And I see that you are still using your failed bacteria argument. Thank you for admitting that you are wrong.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I have been trying to point that out to you -- are you on board with it now?

I think we're all on board that your attempts at argument on this forum have been one giant bucket of fail.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Thank you for admitting that you are wrong again.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I think we're all on board that your attempts at argument on this forum have been one giant bucket of fail.

declaring "victory" over your own statements that are of the form "somewhere some place there exists a text that has the right answer to what you posted" regarding abiogenesis is not the compelling everyone-goes-for-that solution you may have at first supposed.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,335
11,894
Georgia
✟1,091,827.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So at this point do you have anything beyond blind assertions

On the contrary - I point to real life observations of over 50,000 generations.. you point to "I hope" arguments about some text book that you hope might have an answer... (an answer which you don't post).

So then "blind assertions" hmmm...
 
Upvote 0