Primordial Soup Based Origin of Life

[Heissonear]

How life began is not evolution.

Scientists have hypothesis, but nothing concrete....yet. But odds are they will figure it out, and another God claim will disappear.

Did you know when people couldn't explain lightning, they claimed the Gods made it? Seems pretty silly now don't you think? But if you could go back and talk to those people, they would use the exact same arguments you are using to support their claims.

To discuss the science of the beginning of life, could you defend what the research scientists present in Post #418?

 

[Heissonear]

.

For some reason the Naturalists on CF just do noy want to discuss the research publications presented, like Post #418. I wonder why!

 

[Subduction Zone]

.

For some reason the Naturalists on CF just do noy want to discuss the research publications presented, like Post #418. I wonder why!

So, what didn't you understand from that article Heissy?

 

[Heissonear]

So, what didn't you understand from that article Heissy?

First, explain how it is scientific research rather than science fiction for starters.

Secondly, explain to me how the researchers are not using massive conjecture.

Let's hear it.

.

 

[Subduction Zone]

First, explain how it is scientific research rather than science fiction for starters.

Secondly, explain to me how the researchers are not using massive conjecture.

Let's hear it.

.

Please!

Adjust your attitude.

If you are not going to be reasonable there is no point in discussing this article. In fact since you are so unreasonable as to reject a concept that has been tested and found to be correct for over 150 years I don't think you can be reasonable enough to discuss that article.

You are like someone who wants to jump straight into tensor calculus without even understanding the concept of a limit.

 

[Heissonear]

Please!

Adjust your attitude.

If you are not going to be reasonable there is no point in discussing this article. In fact since you are so unreasonable as to reject a concept that has been tested and found to be correct for over 150 years I don't think you can be reasonable enough to discuss that article.

You are like someone who wants to jump straight into tensor calculus without even understanding the concept of a limit.

You mean a religion based on Scientism that has been supported and over promoted by Naturalists for 150 years? You need to see things in the Light, from the One who Created the physical realm by His divine power, knowledge and ability. He is not like you or me; and He can be found in this present age.


.

 

[Loudmouth]

You believe natural processes today is what caused life to occurr on earth billions of years ago. Yet you don't need proof (facts). You base your belief on projections that nobody can explain, nor can any group gather chemicals and "blue prints" and generate any form of life. Man has no clue to how to make live like bacteria, much less a bird, but you are sure past physical processes has, for it sure wasn't in your distorted logic leprechauns.
.

I will ask again.

You find snow on the ground when you go out in the morning. Did it get there through natural means, or are leprechauns an equally valid explanation?

 

[Heissonear]

I will ask again.

You find snow on the ground when you go out in the morning. Did it get there through natural means, or are leprechauns an equally valid explanation?

When it comes to the origin of life on earth, and the many reputable Naturalists publications presented, you have no reply. You have no scientific evidence. You do not defend the publications presented. Your dilemma of being clueless is obvious. No life can be "manufactured" in the lab by biochemists. They cannot make DNA from scratch, with any "Primordial Soup" mixture of inorganic and organic compounds. They try and they try, and the results are vessels of junk - not a rabbit or bird.

But Naturalists say life came about by natural processes and conditions from primitive molecules. So they say, so they believe.

Calling something a hypothesis does not mean it is based on "science" - hypothesis is just another word for faith and trust when it comes to the origin of creatures on earth through natural processes. It is an exercise in faith. They hide their faith as a hypothesis. Yea, right.



.

 

[Loudmouth]

When it comes to the origin of life on earth, and the many reputable Naturalists publications presented, you have no reply. You have no scientific evidence. You do not defend the publications presented. Your dilemma of being clueless is obvious. No life can be "manufactured" in the lab by biochemists. They cannot make DNA from scratch, with any "Primordial Soup" mixture of inorganic and organic compounds. They try and they try, and the results are vessels of junk - not a rabbit or bird.

But Naturalists say life came about by natural processes and conditions from primitive molecules. So they say, so they believe.

Calling something a hypothesis does not mean it is based on "science" - hypothesis is just another word for faith and trust when it comes to the origin of creatures on earth through natural processes. It is an exercise in faith. They hide their faith as a hypothesis. Yea, right.


.

I guess I will have to ask again.

You find snow on the ground when you go out in the morning. Did it get there through natural means, or are leprechauns an equally valid explanation?

 

[Heissonear]

.

It is obvious from the recent posts by Naturalists that they do not want to defend the fellow Naturalists publications I have been presenting. I wonder why? Was it the the request to let me know how I could tell the difference if they were scientific researchers or science fiction authors from the content of the publications?

Probably so. Like I've mentioned, Naturalists have greyed the line between what is real verses not real.


.

 

[kellhus]

. It is obvious from the recent posts by Naturalists that they do not want to defend the fellow Naturalists publications I have been presenting. I wonder why? Was it the the request to let me know how I could tell the difference if they were scientific researchers or science fiction authors from the content of the publications? Probably so. Like I've mentioned, Naturalists have greyed the line between what is real verses not real. .

Or more likely people have lives to attend to outside of posting on the Internet constantly and get bored of refuting the same PRATTs over and over.

 

[Loudmouth]

.

It is obvious from the recent posts by Naturalists that they do not want to defend the fellow Naturalists publications I have been presenting.

What needs to be defended? They are seeking ways that simple replicators could arise from abiotic conditions through natural mechanisms. Why do you have such a problem with that?

Also, almost every second of your life you use naturalism. When you see snow on the ground you think it got there by natural means, not by some leprechaun or supernatural force putting it there. You are a naturalist.

 

[Heissonear]

What needs to be defended? They are seeking ways that simple replicators could arise from abiotic conditions through natural mechanisms. Why do you have such a problem with that?

Also, almost every second of your life you use naturalism. When you see snow on the ground you think it got there by natural means, not by some leprechaun or supernatural force putting it there. You are a naturalist.

Did you know every second of your life eternal spiritual beings are around you and influencing your thoughts, behavior and circumstances?

Did you know that as you are able to see snow that it was at one time just a thought of His in a part of how He would create a physical realm of existence?

Did you know as you look at snow He is the one who makes 4 seasons, the snow to occur the way it naturally does, the light to be brought to our eyes, and our ability to detect even the reflected electromagnetic wavelengths He has given properties and substance to to "bounce" of crystallized water molecules?

Yes, I'm still a naturalists, but a more mature and balanced one since meeting Him. He puts things in their proper place and perspective.


.

 

[Loudmouth]

Did you know every second of your life eternal spiritual beings are around you and influencing your thoughts, behavior and circumstances?

I know that in the same way that I know Santa Claus has flying reindeer.

Did you know as you look at snow He is the one who makes 4 seasons, the snow to occur the way it naturally does, the light to be brought to our eyes, and our ability to detect even the reflected electromagnetic wavelengths He has given properties and substance to to "bounce" of crystallized water molecules?

Any evidence for any of this? Last I checked, the 4 seasons are caused by the relationship between the Sun and the tilt of the Earth. It is all well explained.