Infinite monkey theorem vs first life

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Hey @FrumiousBandersnatch and @Ophiolite keep an eye on this discussion as your involvement will be required soon.

If you ask nicely, I'll consider it.

 

[SLP]

Where are the remains of all of your ancestors from Adam to you?

Heck, that is only about 300 generations!

From dust to dust. you do realize everything doesn't fossilize? right?

So some are dust, and a few fossilized, and are still in the ground or found. And please think before you come back with your point.

"For example, let's take an ape or whatever it is you all think we evolved from, now where are the all but never ending amount of fossils that gradually turned into a man? IOW, if we find several ape fossils and several modern man fossils there would have to be tons of slowly evolving creatures fossils in between there, and for all intents and purposes, we might as well say there are none."​

Amazing...

 

[SLP]

Again, the evolution argument that it happened so it must be true. "Sexes would have evolved". How? It just did not happen.
Creatures without an immune system would perish. The only time an immune system is required is when there is a threat. Too late by then. Even Darwin knew that the eye was a difficulty for his evolution theory. With what we know now, it is not just difficult. Try impossible. Oh but the eye is there (sorry two identical eyes - how did that come about so conveniently?) so evolution must be true. You can get all the Omo in the world but it still won't wash.

I don't want to seem mean, but you really should do a little reading on non-creationist sites, as your assertions are really very silly and naive. And the Darwin eye thing? A great example of why you need to 'get out more.'

 

[SLP]

OK, good, now you see there was much more to it than your misquote.

How, exactly, is a direct quote from your post a "misquote"?

Is that all you have left in your bag of creationist tricks - false accusations to avoid the embarrassment of having been exposed as a plain old hypocrite and, well, liar?

Tell you what go ahead and milk that for all it's worth, I really do understand the need however, you only posting part of the post was enough for me to call it a misquote. It's much like posting part of a story, and the result being as good as a lie, but technically it's not.

Calling a direct, complete quote along with a link a "misquote", in my book, is very much a lie.

Infinite monkey theorem vs first life

↑
Yes, phylogenetically they are dinosaurs,

And does that help to back the evolution claim?

↑
Fossilization is very rare, accessible fossils are much rarer, and fossils that we have found are rarer still.

Of course they're rare....thank you.
Problem with that is, as I already alluded, over the so-called slow process of evolution there would be hundreds or even thousands/millions or more (actually the numbers would be off the charts) in between creature that led up to what we have today, while instead, there are all but none. You are depending in the "bit's and pieces" that I already told you just won't work here (they only work against your claim) in order to make your point?
For example, let's take an ape or whatever it is you all think we evolved from, now where are the all but never ending amount of fossils that gradually turned into a man? IOW, if we find several ape fossils and several modern man fossils there would have to be tons of slowly evolving creatures fossils in between there, and for all intents and purposes, we might as well say there are none.
Again, where are they all?

​

All of that simple-minded tripe is especially entertaining seeing as how you gave yourself an out for presenting fossils from Adam to you - whingeing that 'fossilization is rare blah blah blah'...

Hypocrite.

 

[SLP]

Are you on drugs or something? Do you maybe need to be on drugs?

I didn't only post part of it, I posted the entire thing. All of it. The whole thing. Then I posted it again because you didn't see it the first time, somehow. Then I high-lighted and addressed the problematic parts of it, namely the claims about there needing to be billions of fossils if evolution is true, which is a topic you seem to have abandoned altogether. To argue about being misquoted when you have repeatedly been quoted in your entirety.

He's showing his Christian Creationist stripes, is all.

 

[SLP]

delete

 

[SLP]

"Body plan"? This is evolution, totally random, how can there be a plan?

This is the sort of thing I was referring to.

Read a book not written by a creationist, for crying out loud.

 

[SLP]

There is no plausible reason why "body plans" should be so similar. Why not an ape with four arms?

Right - why DID Jehovah not make a 4-armed ape?

Wyh not people with four or five eyes? You still don't tell my why an immune system would evolve before it knew that it needed one. In your world, all we would have is single celled or simple multicellular organisms. Everything else would succumb to an infection. The complexity of an immune system defies any explanation that evolution can answer, just like the vast majority of the amazing systems that make up life. Do you know how incredibly complex a single cell is? It is impossible for it to just be a mixture of proteins, lipids, amino acids and such. You can create something like it in a lab. Professor Tour will do that for you, presumably for a fee. What will spark a chemical cocktail into life? Miller theorised that lightning might have been the cause. I know how destructive lightning is. It is the last thing you want if you are trying to create life. There is no plausible mechanism apart from, "In the beginning, God created....."

Tour is just a religious hack who is ignorant of evolution and/or lying about it to make some money off the rubes.

And the Miller thing? are you daft? Do you believe EVERY lie told to you by creationists?

Did you just ignore it when I corrected that lie earlier in this thread?

 

[Kenny'sID]

"For example, let's take an ape or whatever it is you all think we evolved from, now where are the all but never ending amount of fossils that gradually turned into a man? IOW, if we find several ape fossils and several modern man fossils there would have to be tons of slowly evolving creatures fossils in between there, and for all intents and purposes, we might as well say there are none."​

Amazing...

Another non post, post.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Close enough:

"But where are all the fossils that show the little legs before they got so little? Those several in between stages of shorter, shorter yet, and even shorter? Let's not conveniently forget about that. "

You're way behind here. Your first comment you deleted, the second said absolutely nothing useful, the 3rd (I think, hard to keep up with useless posts) a prayer (did you ask God to help me ignore what the bible tells us. lol) and now you are rehashing old arguments.

I think it's safe for me to skip reading the rest pf your posts without concern of missing anything.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You're way behind here. Your first comment you deleted, the second said absolutely nothing useful, the 3rd (I think, hard to keep up with useless posts) a prayer (did you ask God to help me ignore what the bible tells us. lol) and now you are rehashing old arguments.

I think it's safe for me to skip reading the rest pf your posts without concern of missing anything.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Oh, the irony.

Brilliant!...THAT changes everything!

 

[SLP]

Another non post, post.

Another dodge to save face, noted.

You've been exposed. Again.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Brilliant!...THAT changes everything!

Case in point

 

[the iconoclast]

If you ask nicely, I'll consider it.

Hey hey

Please consider my request for your future participation. Your opinion may be useful and I think it could be fun.

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

What is it that you would accept as evidence for evolution? Is there anything?

Hey hey 46and2

Lets start with this one. Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator?

Cheers

 

[Shemjaza]

Hey hey 46and2

Lets start with this one. Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator?

Cheers

You should probably take this to a new discussion thread, and leave off the specific users.

(If you only want to discuss it with 46and2, perhaps a private conversation system is the more appropriate medium),

 

[the iconoclast]

You should probably take this to a new discussion thread, and leave off the specific users.

(If you only want to discuss it with 46and2, perhaps a private conversation system is the more appropriate medium),

Hey hey my dear

Pass. 46and2 engaged me, perhaps you should express your concerns to him.

You want something from me my dear? ;p

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

I was interested in wiccan and such a decade or two ago, so the spelling's just stuck with me heh.

Hey hey

Fair enough. Alistair Crowley instantly came to mind, I would advise dropping it as some of us are in the know and such spelling could misrepresent you. However it is up to you what you do. God bless

I understand the process, and how it works.

Heads up brother. Please do not ignore questions, as it may look suspect.

Have you performed/witnessed this process yourself or do you accept an authority on such a matter?

What does this have to with a problem that gets fixed sooner or later? How does this problem get fixed - a solution would assume a conscious element reasoned?

it's like throwing a million dice in the air in sets of 6's, then someone else deciding 26 is the right amount of those set of 6 and those are winners.

What is like throwing a million dice in the air in sets of 6?

with antibiotic resistances, each bacteria mutates in various ways, when you apply antiobiotics those that randomly had the resistance survive,

So we come to the concept of random in a process (.e.g a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end.)

The end is usually desirable and has intention. A process must follow the sequence in order to get a result.

How would you prove/show that random steps or actions - in a process - can be benefical and advantageous?

it's just a natural part of how dna replicates that it's not perfect so makes mistakes that can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful. Beneficial have a more imediate benefit, neutral either mutate away or might later be beneficial, while harmful often don't survive very long so they get weeded out.

It would appear that the core here is positive mutations that are beneficial. Could you provide an example of a positive mutation that are beneficial?

maybe you will do better then the others,

Maybe I will, maybe I won't. It won't stop me trying my dear.

and I try not to question someones intelligence, though it can be a bit tough when you have the same old PRATT's coming up year after year,

So it can be excused because of the same old 'pratts'?

I stuff up regularly and can let some choice words slip out of my mouth too. I would advise not using the word 'Pratt' as it looks inelegant.

most of them failing from the start because the one trying to refute evolution doesn't even have basic understandings of it.

How basic of an understanding does one need to refute evolution?

How would you justify your faith in evolution?

And to be fair many creationists come off as condescending and rude as shown in your post.

I disagree that my behaviour was rude or condescending, I want to support my fellow creationists and I made a statement not to back down and to press evolutionists.

The use of Pratt Would seem rude.

I will admit though I do laugh at creationists at times,

This may seem rude and condescending.

but mostly because it's kinda funny to see you guys so self assured you have disproven evolution when you havn't even made a point that relates to it.

Well let's see if I can change your perception. Lets get into.

Ps
I have no intention to be an enemy to you.

Cheers

 

[Shemjaza]

Hey hey my dear

Pass. 46and2 engaged me, perhaps you should express your concerns to him.

You want something from me my dear? ;p

Cheers

I was merely trying to point out that this is off topic for the thread at large and private person to person are discussions are discouraged on open threads.

I'm fine, iconoclast, I note you have a tendency to start in depth discussions, but wander off before any real clarity can be achieved.