Creationists: Explain how life was created.

[mark kennedy]

Hod? Who dat?

(I know what you mean, but you're just going in circles here. If you don't have an explanation, why keep responding?)

You caught me making a typo, there is still no other explanation.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Note: Not looking for Bible quotes. I'm well aware what it says in Genesis.

What I want is an explanation beyond what is written in Genesis (or any other religious text) that specifically explains how it is possible to create life forms from scratch. Explain how a creator, supernatural or otherwise, would have created fully-formed life forms on Earth.

Describe the mechanisms, energies, forces, processes, etcs, that are involved in bringing fully-formed organisms into existence.

Since genesis says that god "spoke" things into existance, I always pictures some Merlin type dude saying "abracadabra" and poof.

I know you asked not to mention the bible, but since the bible is literally the only source for any of this, it can't be done in any other way.

But I'm guessing that was your point ;-)

 

[DogmaHunter]

But you aren't! You are asking how that fully formed species came to life---how life itself originated---and it is the same question we are asking you and you do not answer!! I don't care about species variation--how did life itself form? That is what you are asking us!

The difference is that "our side" isn't afraid / allergic of the words "we don't know".

So how did first life itself originate? We don't know. Scientists are working towards solving that puzzle. They have a couple of good hypothesis, that have some evidence going for it, but nothing conclusive as of yet.

You creationists however, you are claiming that you DO know. So it's very fair to then ask questions about how you know, what it is that you supposedly know and how you can demonstrate that what you claim to know is actually accurate...

 

[AV1611VET]

Describe the mechanisms, energies, forces, processes, etcs, that are involved in bringing fully-formed organisms into existence.

I'll give this a shot:

1. God takes some dust of the ground.

2. He arranges its molecules ... taking some away ... adding some in ... to make the right arrangement of CHNO + whatever other elements we are.

3. He then injects this "dustman" with vital energy, orgone, odic force, chi, secret ingredient, or whatever you care to call it and presto ... Adam.

 

[AV1611VET]

The difference is that "our side" isn't afraid / allergic of the words "we don't know".

"Your side" seems to be allergic to the term "myopic" though.

I've notice that, and it intrigues me.

I would have thought "your side" would have agreed with me on that, but they seem ... well ... allergic to it.

 

[mmksparbud]

The difference is that "our side" isn't afraid / allergic of the words "we don't know".

So how did first life itself originate? We don't know. Scientists are working towards solving that puzzle. They have a couple of good hypothesis, that have some evidence going for it, but nothing conclusive as of yet.

You creationists however, you are claiming that you DO know. So it's very fair to then ask questions about how you know, what it is that you supposedly know and how you can demonstrate that what you claim to know is actually accurate...

We do---God breathed life into the form of a man He made from dust. Now, since you don't know, how do we check your theory to check if it is accurate? Your believe takes as much faith, if not more, than ours. You believe in an "I don't know"---we believe in a God that has the power to do it. Since we don't have the power--we can't do it---neither can you create it with your "I don't know."

 

[NBB]

Maybe we christians don't know much about how God can create things, except that his intelligence is very high, and his power can manipulate and create matter, but the important part is what is the truth, at least as i see is better one simple truth, than an elaborated sofisticated lie.

 

[pitabread]

God breathed life into the form of a man He made from dust.

And how does that process work? So far you've given me: statues, air and energy. But you haven't even begun to explain how it all connects.

ow, since you don't know, how do we check your theory to check if it is accurate?

I'm talking about origin of species in the OP. The scientific explanation for that is biological evolution, as I have repeatedly stated.

If you have an alternative, then explain how it happened.

Your believe takes as much faith, if not more, than ours.

We have observable processes of biological evolution. That's how we can explain the origin of species; there's no faith in observing how biological populations change over time. We can see it happening and understand the mechanisms behind it.

Even if you want to argue the ultimate origin of life, it's all chemistry/biochemistry. For example, I can point you to how organic protocells can form (this site has some neat animations which walk through the processes). No faith needed, just chemistry.

Now if you want to argue that the above is not how it happened, then you need to bring something to table. So far we've got statues, air and energy. What's next? What are the steps? How does one go from those basics into a fully-formed living organism?

 

[pitabread]

So how did first life itself originate? We don't know.

I'd be careful about letting creationists play the "god-of-the-gaps" card here. This is why I'm focusing on origin of species. We know how that happened: biological evolution.

Creationists want to argue that we should replace that explanation for the origin of species, but haven't otherwise offered an explanation as to how it happened.

That we're seeing deflection already regarding the ultimate origin of life (e.g. the first living thing) is a red herring. I'm not interested in that discussion, just the origin of species.

 

[mmksparbud]

And how does that process work? So far you've given me: statues, air and energy. But you haven't even begun to explain how it all connects.



I'm talking about origin of species in the OP. The scientific explanation for that is biological evolution, as I have repeatedly stated.

If you have an alternative, then explain how it happened.



We have observable processes of biological evolution. That's how we can explain the origin of species; there's no faith in observing how biological populations change over time. We can see it happening and understand the mechanisms behind it.

Even if you want to argue the ultimate origin of life, it's all chemistry/biochemistry. For example, I can point you to how organic protocells can form (this site has some neat animations which walk through the processes). No faith needed, just chemistry.

Now if you want to argue that the above is not how it happened, then you need to bring something to table. So far we've got statues, air and energy. What's next? What are the steps? How does one go from those basics into a fully-formed living organism?

You just don't get it----God breathed into it--that was it---His breathe is life. Nothing else. He is life. You haven't said a thing about how you say life began---at least Dogma in post#63 admitted you don't know.

 

[DogmaHunter]

We do---God breathed life into the form of a man He made from dust.

That is what you believe religiously, yes.
Many people believe lots of things.

Now, since you don't know, how do we check your theory to check if it is accurate?

Scientists test the ideas they come up with against empirical reality and go from there.

Your believe takes as much faith, if not more, than ours.

Huh? What "belief"? What is it about the words "we don't know" that you don't comprehend?

You believe in an "I don't know"

That makes zero sense.

---we believe in a God that has the power to do it.

Yes, the question is why.

Since we don't have the power--we can't do it---neither can you create it with your "I don't know."

Great.

Now, as for answering those questions....
Are you planning on attempting to do so any time soon?
Or are you just going to continue posting meaningless and senseless objections accompagned by your religious assertions?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Maybe we christians don't know much about how God can create things, except that his intelligence is very high, and his power can manipulate and create matter, but the important part is what is the truth, at least as i see is better one simple truth, than an elaborated sofisticated lie.

How do you distinguish truth from fiction?
How do you know that what you believe is accurate?

 

[DogmaHunter]

I'd be careful about letting creationists play the "god-of-the-gaps" card here.

We disagree there.
If they play that card, they are essentially forfeiting.

It exposes the fact that all they have are religious beliefs, appeals to ignorance and arguments from incredulity.

This is why I'm focusing on origin of species. We know how that happened: biological evolution.

True. But you just know in advance that they'll just move the goalpost towards the origins of life itself.

Creationists want to argue that we should replace that explanation for the origin of species, but haven't otherwise offered an explanation as to how it happened.

That we're seeing deflection already regarding the ultimate origin of life (e.g. the first living thing) is a red herring. I'm not interested in that discussion, just the origin of species.

I hear you. Sounds a bit optimist though.
I wish you good luck! ;-)

I'll try and play along.

 

[mmksparbud]

Scientists test the ideas they come up with against empirical reality and go from there.

So---you have tested how life began and reproduced it?

Huh? What "belief"? What is it about the words "we don't know" that you don't comprehend?

I understand it. You don't know and you can't say how life began and you can not reproduce it in any way---You therefore believe in nothing---because you do not know and are positively believing that your theory about life is true but you don't know--right---makes perfect sense. If you can not state how life began--you have nothing to talk about. We know-it began with the very breath of God. That is it.
Can't be reproduced---until you do so---you have nothing.

 

[mmksparbud]

Yes, the question is why.

Because He could. Because He wanted to---why do you have children? He is the Creator of all. Why do people paint? Why do people sing? Why do people write? Why do people dance? Why does anyone create anything? Because it is who they are and what they do and what they love to do.

 

[NBB]

How do you distinguish truth from fiction?
How do you know that what you believe is accurate?

It's always the same, if i tell i have God in my life and i have experienced him. Others will say muslims experienced allah or something, and my spiritual experiences are hallucinations.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You just don't get it----God breathed into it--that was it---His breathe is life. Nothing else.

How does that work?
And how do you know?

He is life.

Really? So how did "life" originate? ;-)

You haven't said a thing about how you say life began---at least Dogma in post#63 admitted you don't know.

*ahum*

acknowledged.

Perhaps you see them as synonymous, but to me, "admit" sounds as if I did something wrong or was accused of something and then "admitted" guilt.

That we ("we" being human kind, through science) don't know how life originated exactly, is not some secret.

@pitabread will likely fully agree to this. It's just that his OP is about the origins of species, not of life itself. He's just trying really hard to not allow evolution deniers to derail the thread into another subject.

 

[DogmaHunter]

So---you have tested how life began and reproduced it?

I'm not a scientist.
Actual scientists who work by doing research in the field of abiogenesis, do such things every day when they go to work. It literally is their job.

And no, they haven't reproduced it yet. If they did, then we wouldn't have to say that "we don't know how exactly life originated".

See, scientists aren't content with just making claims like "nature-did-it". Nature did nothing at all until they can actually explain what "nature did" at what time, using which processes etc.

Unlike you people where you are content with only saying "god dun it".
That's the difference between religion and science.

Religion asserts, even before asking the questions.
Science explains, and only after lots of research and the harsh scrutiny of peers who double and tripple check results, methods, data, experiment set ups, etc etc etc to make sure it is valid.

I understand it.

You say that, but what you write says otherwise.

You don't know and you can't say how life began and you can not reproduce it in any way---You therefore believe in nothing

See? You don't understand.

I don't believe "in" nothing.
I just believe nothing. No "in". Because there is nothing to believe, since we don't know.

Derp di derp derp.

---because you do not know and are positively believing that your theory about life is true but you don't know

I was searching for a "facepalm" google image. But in all honesty, the only ones I could find that truelly reflect how much of a facepalm moment that statement is, would probably get me banned.

If you don't know, then you have no theory, Zweistein.

--right---makes perfect sense.

Quite the opposite........................

If you can not state how life began--you have nothing to talk about. We know-it began with the very breath of God. That is it.

That's what you believe religiously.
Beliefs and knowledge, aren't the same thing.

Can't be reproduced---until you do so---you have nothing.

Good luck reproducing "god dun it".

 

[DogmaHunter]

Because He could. Because He wanted to---why do you have children?

Because I had an inexplicable biological urge to reproduce.

Why do people paint? Why do people sing? Why do people write? Why do people dance?

To express themselves, their emotions. Or just for entertainment.

Why does anyone create anything?

To express themselves or to earn money.


So I guess God had biological urges, wanted to be an artist or was trying to make money?

 

[mmksparbud]

How does that work?
And how do you know?

Only God knows! The bible says so, I believe it and you can't prove otherwise. You state exactly how life began --you don't know.

Really? So how did "life" originate? ;-)

He breathed into the dust----I'm pretty sure I already said that.

@pitabread will likely fully agree to this. It's just that his OP is about the origins of species, not of life itself. He's just trying really hard to not allow evolution deniers to derail the thread into another subject.

No---that is not what he is asking. We said, God made man from the dust of the earth--that is how man was made--He then said he wants details about that process---which then is asking the process of life itself. And we keep saying----God's breath is life. You are asking how life originated---that is the bottom line of what you are asking. God made the animals and breathed life into them. Same thing as man. So all we're doing is going round in circles---