On The Impossibility Of Abiogenesis.

OK, so let's say the universe didn't come from nothing. That still doesn't mean God did it. It could have been Vishnu, Coyote and Raven, Odin, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. So, unless you can prove the existence of your god, it is just one more unproven hypothesis.

 

There are hundreds of Labs doing this....but there are 4 very difficult to pass protocols that exist as from what I know it would seem it is much easier to generate Genesis in a Lab than it is to PROVE that the Genesis Tank and Control Tanks used are 100% certified STERILE as Life is invasive and pervasive.

NASA spends BILLIONS just trying to limit Earth Microbe contamination in and on Probes but even NASA has not been able to accomplish this thus there are right now living Earth Microbes on Mars, the Moon, Titan, Asteroids a Comet and other Celestial bodies.

AA

 

Problems with the creationists' "it's so improbable" calculations
1) They calculate the probability of the formation of a "modern" protein, or even a complete bacterium with all "modern" proteins, by random events. This is not the abiogenesis theory at all.
2) They assume that there is a fixed number of proteins, with fixed sequences for each protein, that are required for life.
3) They calculate the probability of sequential trials, rather than simultaneous trials.
4) They misunderstand what is meant by a probability calculation.
5) They seriously underestimate the number of functional enzymes/ribozymes present in a group of random sequences.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 

Atheists are profoundly obsessed with those who believe in God, not God itself. Unless you're suggesting that people like you don't exist, your argument is moot.

 

What is funny is they don't realize that the Probability that a GOD as advertised in the Bible is so little it exists at 1 chance in 10^178th.

A Statistical Impossibility exists at 1 chance in 10^150th.....which is 1 chance in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or 1 chance in 10^28th GREATER than 10^178th!!! LOL!!!

AA

 

What are the odds of me rolling double sixes 100 times in a row? Statistics are meaningless unless you understand how a process works.

 

They appear not to realize a "number" of things.

 

And yet there are enormous numbers of creatures that are unlikely alive.... Tyranasaurus, saber tooth tigers, etc
And even if a dodo bird still remained alive, it is unclear what that would prove

 

1 chance in 6.

AA

 

You know....a while back some member was arguing tooth and nail that my statement that the Probability that HEADS would come up on a perfectly balanced and even coin flipped in a perfectly balanced manner where the coin once flipped and landed PERFECTLY on it's edge on a perfectly flat and level and perfectly smooth floor in a vacuum that I said the Probability and ODDS that Heads would come up 100 times out of 100 tosses was 50/50.

He argued and argued and I finally explained to him WHY the odds were 1 chance in 2 or 50/50 even for heads to come out 100 times in a row.

After I explained why and after he accepted this as he was much like our member here you are referring to....I then BLEW HIS MIND.....by bringing in CHAOS THEORY BASED PROBABILITY CALCULATIONS.....which as some know after the coin was flipped 100's of thousands or millions of times a PATTERN would be observed that would define everything from the barometric pressure to the Moon being directly above and even detail when large vehicles in number might be driving by the building.

Do you understand what I am talking about?

I think you do but if not or if any member want's an explanation.....just ask me in a PM.

AA

 

That assumes that I roll a standard 6-sided dice. I could be rolling a 20-sided dice or a 6-sided dice with "6" on each side. As I said, statistics are meaningless unless you understand the process.

Creationists love to spout off statistical nonsense about a process scientists don't even understand, much less the creationists themselves.

 

Dinosaurs were around for around a hundred and fifty million years. Man has been around, less than one hundred thousand.

 

Indeed my question is trivially simple.
You has not provided an answer after me rephrasing it 3 times, unless you think that answering is
dancing around and away instead if giving a trivial yes or no answer.

 

You seem to be afraid to discuss the Fallacy of God of Gaps, too.
You decided to switch to the fallacy of the Burden of proof.
You will never know your mistake in God of gaps.
You will be dancing around and away from knowing your mistake about the burden of proof.
So I will not start from asking a simple question to make you dance, I will tell you.
\
In general I may argue the fact, that people in this civilization knew about existence God long before
people from other civilization came with their denial of existence of God.
Thus the burden of proof that God does not exist is on the representatives of other civilization.
(If you wish I can demonstrate you that the claim “One cannot prove negative” is fallacious)
\
\
But the real thing is that in this civilizations logic started in philosophy, in love to truth.
It is not love to making, killing and eating an enemy.
It is the matter of both going on the road to the truth together due to the shared love to the same subject.
Thus your first opponent must be yourself.
Since obviously there are debates about existence of God and you come to such debates,
First
you must most fiercely be putting up arguments for existence of God in front of yourself, and
you must most fiercely be putting up arguments against existence of God in front of yourself.
Only then you can come to me and say - I have weighted all arguments I could think of
for and against existence of God
and arguments against prevailed.
Nobody so far was able to point to a mistake I did.
These are arguments which prevailed.
Can you come up with something showing that I may be did a mistake?
\
But when you are coming with the goal to shift the burden,
you are ignoring the underlining principal of logic, - love to truth.
You are not interested in truth.
You are looking for an easy way to bail out, of any questioning of your beliefs and your arguments.
But your logic is faulty,

 

I was discussing the God of the Gaps and just pointed out that before you can include God into the gap, you have to prove there is a God

There are religions that are far older than even Judaism that did not believe in God. Please show proof of otherwise.

What is this supposed to even mean?

I have done this many times and still do this and the answer is always the same.

The only mistake you are making is not following basic logic.

You say that the underlining principal of logic to love to truth and then you tell me MY logic is faulty?

 

Because you have not come up with any arguments against existence of God,
but with the exactly the same attempt to bail out of the questioning of your logic by shifting the burden of prove.

While making claims which are relating neither to my post
nor to any reality of this civilization,
but self-contradicting.

And no, one does not have to prove that God exist before making a proof (God of gaps) that
God does not exist.
That is a total absurd

 

God doesn't exist because Odin does, so if you want to prove existence of your god, please prove that Odin does not.

 

You see you can do.

I accept as true that Odin exists.
How does it prove that God does not exist?

 

Because the Bible says there are no other gods but God.

 

But we don't know if it is true or not, yet, do we?

 

I'm answering every question you ask. And, the answer is the same.

It is you who is dancing.

 

Well obviously I assumed we were talking about a 6 sided die.

AA

 

Just as creationists assume they understand abiogenesis, while it is obvious that they don't.

 

They don't even understand the 6 sided calculation!! LOL!!

AA

 

So you agree that if we cannot know if something is true or false, it cannot be used as evidence.