Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
If you would like to explain how the inner cell evolved each and every function and feature explained I would be glad to listen.
Upvote
0
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.
Let me get this straight, if something is complex then a magic man must have designed it because there is no other way
[as far as you're concerned] it could have come about, am I close?
Right, no evidence of how molecular machines could arise or how their purposeful function arose with them.
In fact, man produced the nested hierarchy using ad hoc categorization with creatures that were created through adaptation and change in a process that looking back upon can be put into different kinds of life forms. Exactly what we would expect with what Genesis says we should see.
The recognition of design is present, it is hand waved away by claiming it is an illusion. The evidence is the design seen in life forms.
Exactly, just like we don't find evidence for trees and flowers in the pre-cambrian like Genesis 1 claims.
We are looking back at creation. Life is made up of different kinds that came from the same kinds prior to them and followed by others of the same.
We see it because that is how we have categorized life forms.
Nonsense.
If you would like to explain how the inner cell evolved each and every function and feature explained I would be glad to listen.
Yes, it does mean they don't exist then. In fact there are no terrestrial Precambrian or even Cambrian fossils at all. They are all of marine origin. Flowers don't appear in the fossil record until the Cretaceous Period around 130 Ma.Exactly, just like we don't find evidence for trees and flowers in the pre-cambrian like Genesis 1 claims. We don't have those fossils but that doesn't mean they didn't exist.
As it happens I don't know but even if I did explain it to you it would not change your mind, all you would do is latch onto something else and ask for that to be explained to you, I recommend you stick with the magic man?If you would like to explain how the inner cell evolved each and every function and feature explained I would be glad to listen.
Yes, it does mean they don't exist then. In fact there are no terrestrial Precambrian or even Cambrian fossils at all. They are all of marine origin. Flowers don't appear in the fossil record until the Cretaceous Period around 130 Ma.
You are claiming that evolution is completely capable of producing the inner workings of the cell. This is a natural process that you claim has been shown to produce it. This takes evidence to make that claim.Why don't you explain how a supernatural deity designed the cell. Give us a step by step procedure of how it was done.
No lack of focus I am babysitting. Let me try again. In snowflakes and crystals there is no complexity in function or purpose. The molecular machines in living things are very purposeful and complex.
You are claiming that evolution is completely capable of producing the inner workings of the cell.
And you will never change your mind about the magic maker Natural Selection of evolution. You will continue even after seeing just how far fetched it is for a mindless, purposeless process with no goals to produce such complicated and complex molecular machines that we find in life forms on earth to think it is a product of this mindless, purposeless process.As it happens I don't know but even if I did explain it to you it would not change your mind, all you would do is latch onto something else and ask for that to be explained to you, I recommend you stick with the magic man?
There is no purpose. It is a disease. Just like every other disease.So... what's the "purpose" of HIV Protease mechanics?
Here I will show you how proteins "appear" in the cell.I am claiming that natural processes are able to do that, which includes transcription and translation. Or are you trying to argue that proteins appear by magic inside of cells?
Here I will show you how proteins "appear" in the cell.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v493/n7430/full/nature11777.html
Article preview View full access options
Nature | Letter
Ediacaran life on land
Nature
493,
89–92
(03 January 2013)
doi:10.1038/nature11777
Received
11 July 2012
Accepted
09 November 2012
Published online
12 December 2012
Ediacaran (635–542million years ago) fossils have been regarded as early animal ancestors of the Cambrian evolutionary explosion of marine invertebrate phyla1, as giant marine protists2 and as lichenized fungi3. Recent documentation of palaeosols in the Ediacara Member of the Rawnsley Quartzite of South Australia4 confirms past interpretations of lagoonal–aeolian deposition based on synsedimentary ferruginization and loessic texture5, 6. Further evidence for palaeosols comes from non-marine facies, dilation cracks, soil nodules, sand crystals, stable isotopic data and mass balance geochemistry4. Here I show that the uppermost surfaces of the palaeosols have a variety of fossils in growth position, including Charniodiscus, Dickinsonia, Hallidaya, Parvancorina, Phyllozoon, Praecambridium, Rugoconites, Tribrachidium and ‘old-elephant skin’ (ichnogenus Rivularites7). These fossils were preserved as ferruginous impressions, like plant fossils8, and biological soil crusts9, 10 of Phanerozoic eon sandy palaeosols. Sand crystals after gypsum11 and nodules of carbonate12 are shallow within the palaeosols4, even after correcting for burial compaction13. Periglacial involutions and modest geochemical differentiation of the palaeosols are evidence of a dry, cold temperate Ediacaran palaeoclimate in South Australia4. This new interpretation of some Ediacaran fossils as large sessile organisms of cool, dry soils, is compatible with observations that Ediacaran fossils were similar in appearance and preservation to lichens and other microbial colonies of biological soil crusts3, rather than marine animals1, or protists2.
No evidence of them.Interesting, thanks. However, still not flowers. Right?
What are the natural ones? Like I said, it is not denied that God being a supernatural Being would not have the ability to produce such mechanisms.What supernatural processes are you saying are involved? Where is the evidence for those supernatural mechanisms?
What are the natural ones?
Show a flower in the Ediacaran and you will certainly shake the scientific world. As for Ediacaran terrestrial fossils, I did notice that your cited paper and several others I was able to source are rather recent, thus an indication that I'm not up to date with respect to the earliest terrestrial fossils.No evidence of them.
Right, and I might add this was heavily disputed and was about as welcome as the flowers would be I assure you.Show a flower in the Ediacaran and you will certainly shake the scientific world. As for Ediacaran terrestrial fossils, I did notice that your cited paper and several others I was able to source are rather recent, thus an indication that I'm not up to date with respect to the earliest terrestrial fossils.
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?