Natural selection v Intelligent design

[Loudmouth]

Well Lab experiments actually supports my hypothesis than yours because it shows a guidance or selected cause before things originated.

Where?

Anyhow nothing can confirm if the conditions in Labs are the same as the prebiotic soup.

We aren't talking about the pre-biotic soup. We are talking about the reactions that occur within life. You claimed that it wasn't chemical or physical. That turns out to be false.

If natural selection did not exist in the prebiotic soup, then in your opinion how did the first cell originate?

I don't know how the first cell originated. However, that is irrelevant for a discussion on evolution and living cells. We don't need to know how life originated in order to understand how life changed once it was here.

A least complex living cell that even qualifies for self organization would require several hundreds of proteins and amino acids with specifies also RNA and DNA as blueprints to pass or transmit the gene.

Irrelevant.

 

[Zlatanara]

Still kind of vague. Rather than playing 20-questions, could you pop over to godchecker.com and pick out which one specifically?

http://www.godchecker.com

Thanks.

Well it does not talk about the Creator

it talks about theological approaches taken in different cultures to connect to the creator. But it all proves that people have always believed in a creator under different labels which is fascinating.

 

[Zlatanara]

Where?



We aren't talking about the pre-biotic soup. We are talking about the reactions that occur within life. You claimed that it wasn't chemical or physical. That turns out to be false.



I don't know how the first cell originated. However, that is irrelevant for a discussion on evolution and living cells. We don't need to know how life originated in order to understand how life changed once it was here.



Irrelevant.

I was referring to the joice experiment and the lab assistant

well i am a huge supporter of adaptation and micro evolution, may be you did not get the context of my question

When i spoke of certain facts that did not show chemical explanation i was referring to chemical evolution, heck did you not even see the term RNA world in my discussion. Gosh is this why i was seeing so many irrelevant responds and wikipedia links from you.

So you dont have an answer for chemical evolution? is this because there is only so little chemical can explain?

i never spoke of biotic soups always spoke about prebiotic soup, seems there is something wrong with your responds

 

[Loudmouth]

When i spoke of certain facts that did not show chemical explanation i was referring to chemical evolution, heck did you not even see the term RNA world in my discussion. Gosh is this why i was seeing so many irrelevant responds and wikipedia links from you.

Look at the thread title and earlier posts. We are talking about evolution, not abiogenesis.

So you dont have an answer for chemical evolution? is this because there is only so little chemical can explain?

What little chemistry and physics can explain is light years ahead of what ID/Creationists can explain. What explanations do they give, other than "God did it"? What are the specific reactions that ID/Creationists are proposing? Time lines? Mechanisms? What exactly?

 

[Zlatanara]

Why couldn't God create species that violate a nested hierarchy?

Well God creates species suitable for the environment he decided to put them on. The code he coded has adapted into so many different environments and conditions.

 

[Zlatanara]

Look at the thread title and earlier posts. We are talking about evolution, not abiogenesis.



What little chemistry and physics can explain is light years ahead of what ID/Creationists can explain. What explanations do they give, other than "God did it"? What are the specific reactions that ID/Creationists are proposing? Time lines? Mechanisms? What exactly?

im not sure how you did not see my least complex cell claim and origin of information in prebiotic condition.

Anyhow like i said before, its clear that its impossible to explain chemical evolution especially thinking of its complexity.

Unless you are here to give your thoughts on the origin of first life and information in a prebiotic condition this discussion will be going all wikipedia and signature in the cell notes on no right direction.

 

[Loudmouth]

Well God creates species suitable for the environment he decided to put them on. The code he coded has adapted into so many different environments and conditions.

That doesn't explain the nested hierarchy. God could create a species with a mixture of bird and [mammal] features. No matter how much it adapted, it would still be a violation of the nested hierarchy.

 

[Loudmouth]

im not sure how you did not see my least complex cell claim and origin of information in prebiotic condition.

I'm not sure why you still don't understand that this is a discussion about evolution.

Anyhow like i said before, its clear that its impossible to explain chemical evolution especially thinking of its complexity.

So how does ID/Creationism explain it with reference to evidence? What are the mechanisms? Timeline?

 

[Davian]

Well it does not talk about the Creator

It does list a good number of creator gods.

it talks about theological approaches taken in different cultures to connect to the creator. But it all proves that people have always believed in a creator under different labels which is fascinating.

Indeed, like there is no underlying truth to all of it.

To be clear, you are not just positing a god-of-the-gaps, but that mainstream science, such as evolutionary theory, is wrong. Anything else? Cosmology? Gravitational theory? Germ theory?

 

[Zlatanara]

That doesn't explain the nested hierarchy. God could create a species with a mixture of bird and [mammal] features. No matter how much it adapted, it would still be a violation of the nested hierarchy.

Whats wrong with God using structural organization?

 

[Loudmouth]

Whats wrong with God using structural organization?

Where is the evidence for it?

 

[HitchSlap]

Whats wrong with God using structural organization?

Because it looks just like natural selection.

 

[Zlatanara]

It does list a good number of creator gods.

Indeed, like there is no underlying truth to all of it.

To be clear, you are not just positing a god-of-the-gaps, but that mainstream science, such as evolutionary theory, is wrong. Anything else? Cosmology? Gravitational theory? Germ theory?

Well there is truth in a creator to me, im sorry it does not work for you

you are completely ignorant on my evolution claims which is sad

i have never said i am against evolution theory

i am speaking about chemical evolution.

All i am saying is there is a coder behind the software of life, progress of the software does not contradict with the fact that it has a coder.

 

[Zlatanara]

Because it looks just like natural selection.

well another way to see is gift of Adaptation

 

[Zlatanara]

Where is the evidence for it?

can you prove to me how did natural selection originate?

 

[Loudmouth]

well another way to see is gift of Adaptation

Is weather the gift of Condensation?

 

[Loudmouth]

can you prove to me how did natural selection originate?

Notice how you have to shift the conversation away from ID/Creationism.

 

[Zlatanara]

Notice how you have to shift the conversation away from ID/Creationism.

another unanswered question just as chemical evolution?

 

[Loudmouth]

another unanswered question just as chemical evolution?

Are you saying that ID/Creationism has as much evidence as abiogenesis?

 

[Zlatanara]

Is weather the gift of Condensation?

no idea