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.
Exactly, and ascribing a deity to it, doesn't get us any closer to a better understanding.Then I have no answer to the question.
You guys don't realize it, but you're QEDing the OP.
You're demonstrating the OP is correct.I don't know what that means.
We're not trying to explain where the laws of nature came from!
We're trying to explain where life came from. If we can do that without having to drastically change the laws of nature, then our explanation is much more likely to be accurate than one which does require such changes.
All of them. Not a single serious hypothesis for the origin of life requires 'nothing to come out of nowhere'. Only one 'explanation' for the origin of life requires complex acids and sugars to magically appear out of nowhere, and that's your explanation.
How can it be wrong, when you're demonstrating it to be correct?No, you don't realize the OP is wrong.
Is this what those who study this, believe?Correction:
"And that has led you to what conclusion? See, with no explanation to where the laws of nature originated, you have very little, so might be a good idea to realize you can't use the laws of nature to explain where life came from because at one time there may have been no laws of nature."
The laws of nature MUST be explained first or you don't have all the equation.
One cannot explain fully or even begin to explain life without explaining where it started. We've been over this several times and as much as folks would like to throw that fact out, you got nothing without it.
How did things begin...from the start. Choose any hypothesis you like to expand on.
'There may have been no laws of nature'. There is zero evidence to suggest the laws of nature have ever been different from what we observe today, since the beginning of the universe (which, btw, was a long time before life on Earth originated)."And that has led you to what conclusion? See, with no explanation to where the laws of nature originated, you have very little, so might be a good idea to realize you can't use the laws of nature to explain where life came from because at one time there may have been no laws of nature."
Wait until the Rapture, when all the scientists will go running to their sacred SETI sites to sing their global anthem:Living under a bridge is not one of his shortcomings.
You can laugh, but I believe her plea was answered.
paul becke said: ↑
Read this and weep, atheists :
LOL.with laughter!
Jimmy D said: ↑
Pass me the *sniff* tissues.
False dichotomies, arguments from ignorance, quote mines, I just wasted 5 minutes of my life.
Thanks for saving me 5 minutes!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?