"Life and its building blocks are way too complicated to have evolved." [moved]

[doubtingmerle]

Yeah, I get that. But I think that since -57 explicitly mentioned evolving, I think it's possible that 'building blocks of life' is DNA.

The building blocks of life in the title of this thread come form -57's claim in another thread. As he immediately responded here with post 3 arguing for the complexity of motor proteins, I take it that he means the proteins in cells are too complex to have evolved. However he had done nothing to prove his point. Earlier in this thread there was a link to a video showing the proven relationship to simpler motor proteins and other proteins in the cell, showing the likely path of evolution.

 

[joshua 1 9]

A black hole isn't nothing, it's pretty much the extreme opposite - the most dense concentration of matter there can be.

Exactly, when you have NOTHING then you create a vacuum and everything collapses in on itself. I remember the very last Myth Busters show for their grand finale they wanted to create a vacuum in a railroad tank car to get it to collapse in on itself. They did finally accomplish their objective but they had to compromise the integrity of the structure to get the tank to collapse.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Exactly, when you have NOTHING then you create a vacuum and everything collapses in on itself.

A vacuum is just empty spacetime. Krauss's 'nothing' is the vacuum; it's not the absence of everything, there's still fluctuating quantum fields there producing virtual particles; but what does that have to do with black holes?

This reminds me of an idea we had at uni - we invented the 'Hackenthorpe Vacuum' - you take a flask containing an ordinary vacuum and suck all the vacuum out...

 

[joshua 1 9]

Krauss is talking about empty spacetime prior to the emergence of the universe as we know it; popular hypotheses are quantum fluctuation and the 'empty spacetime is unstable' idea.

Prior to the existing universe would be covered by Quantum Physics and I do not know that much about Quantum Physics

the universe itself has no start or end point in time because, in a sense, time starts and ends within the universe

Yes that is considered to be a part of the Big Bang when time became a part of or took hold of the Universe. Dr Gerold Schroeder talks about this and he knows a lot more about Physics and a lot more about the Kabbalah then I know.

As you say a black hole has more to do with gravity then a vacuum.

.

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm still waiting for "you" and honest debate being in the same sentence.

That makes no sense at all. The post you quoted have both "you" and "honest debate" in the same sentence.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That makes no sense at all. The post you quoted have both "you" and "honest debate" in the same sentence.

I believe that -57 is under the impression that you yourself are not debating honestly.

 

[SteveB28]

I've sceen video of larry. He's pretty much incompetent....and requires something...yet seems to deny it is there. Larry is quite a joke.

And you call someone else "incompetent".....?

 

[VirOptimus]

I believe that -57 is under the impression that you yourself are not debating honestly.

Thats my guess too, but then again, why didnt he/she write so?

 

[MasonP]

That would be true. An imagines entity didn't create it. A real entity did.

A real entity so real it requires faith to believe in it.

 

[-57]

Your video misrepresents what was done. It ignores the evidence that the Lucy's hip was constructed correctly, and ignores the other bones found of the same species as Lucy. Finally the quote at the end of the video is taken completely out of context. The person quoted was not trying to say what he is represented as saying.

So where is the fraud here? I would say it was the man in your video that is fraudulent. See

Lovejoy cut away bone. He fit it according to evo-interpretations. That's the facts.

 

[-57]

A real entity so real it requires faith to believe in it.

Unless you can come up with a way to create the universe from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Lovejoy cut away bone. He fit it according to evo-interpretations. That's the facts.

Uh, no, he cut plaster which came from a mold of rocks that had formed based on the bones that were lying in them. He cut no bones. As it shows in the video I posted, the rocks were damaged in the area in question.

As the video explained, the rest of the the bones were consistent with the reconstruction of the hip as it was done.

As the video explained, Lucy's hip was clearly shaped like the human hip to walk upright, not like the hip of other apes.

As the video explained, multiple other members of the same species as Lucy have been found, all consistent with the conclusion they had a hip that had evolved to walk upright.

Not only does the hipbone show Lucy's species walked upright, but the knees and feet also show this.

So no, there is no question within modern science that Lucy and her species walked upright.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Unless you can come up with a way to create the universe from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator.

And unless you can come up with a way to create the creator from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator of your creator?

And unless you can come up with a way to create the creator of your creator from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator of the creator of your creator?

I feel an infinite regress coming on. Either that or reality always had a fundamental essence that caused it to create our universe. Perhaps that fundamental reality first created a multiverse, a previous universe, a creator, or who knows what else.

 

[-57]

And unless you can come up with a way to create the creator from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator of your creator?

And unless you can come up with a way to create the creator of your creator from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator of the creator of your creator?

I feel an infinite regress coming on. Either that or reality always had a fundamental essence that caused it to create our universe. Perhaps that fundamental reality first created a multiverse, a previous universe, a creator, or who knows what else.

The creator always was and never wasn't. It's that simple. There has to be a being that always was and never wasn't or else there would be NOTHING today.

 

[doubtingmerle]

The creator always was and never wasn't. It's that simple. There has to be a being that always was and never wasn't or else there would be NOTHING today.

As I said, there was probably an ultimate essence of reality that always existed. On that we agree. This essence somehow produced everything that is. The difference between us is that I do not think this essence had to be a person, or have a mind. Do you have any evidence this essence had to have a mind?

 

[SteveB28]

The creator always was and never wasn't. It's that simple. There has to be a being that always was and never wasn't or else there would be NOTHING today.

That's a wonderful false dichotomy you have there...........





.

 

[MasonP]

The creator always was and never wasn't. It's that simple. There has to be a being that always was and never wasn't or else there would be NOTHING today.

Now that's what I would call fortuitous, suspiciously fortuitous, in fact it's so fortuitous it was more than likely made up.

 

[mzungu]

Unless you can come up with a way to create the universe from nothing without "help"...there has to be a creator.

"Nothing" is a meaningless concept in science.
Perhaps you may take the trouble to define "Nothing" for us?

 

[AV1611VET]

"Nothing" is a meaningless concept in science.

Science is myopic.

Perhaps you may take the trouble to define "Nothing" for us?

I'll try.

NOTHING is a dimension devoid of time, space, matter, spirit and Heaven.

Hopefully, that should at least serve as a good working definition.

 

[MasonP]

Science is myopic.

It is, it only recognises things for which there is evidence, religions accept whatever the believers want to believe.