...This could happen by chance in a warm pond, given there was a bored geneticist named God taking a bath in the pond at the time.........So your "theory" is that there exists a God, who got bored, created DNA, and left it on Earth, possibly while bathing? And your theory is that the pond got bored and then the pond began creating hard drives that contain chemical code. It always comes back to this point, the question then becomes, what is more logical. A more logical theory would be that DNA came from something simpler, not something extremely complex like a god that can produce DNA. The simpler thing is what we know forms DNA, amino acids, and we have pretty good evidence those can form in stars, (edit) or at least the prebiotic molecules that can form amino acids were formed there.
Both humans and the apes and mice are descended from rats.That was slip of the pen, right. :wow: {… er key strokes} Humans and apes and mice and rats are descended from rat-like creatures that lived millions and millions of years ago :)
Evolution disproved in one sentence? Reminds me of how god has been disproved in one sentence: "No logical evidence."Unfortunately, Coral Star can't wrap his mind around that. :lol:
So where did rats come from? Or any other species?The egg. :coolsmile: Actually it was from the title of a book I read some years ago; I don't have it any longer and don't remember all the details, but the substance was that all humanoids were descended from a rat like creature(s), the argument was based on genetic investigation. One of its main points was that today's rats are disease carriers that effect humans because they are so genetically similar which is why medical experimenting with rats and mice is so productive.
...This could happen by chance in a warm pond, given there was a bored geneticist named God taking a bath in the pond at the time.........So your "theory" is that there exists a God, who got bored, created DNA, and left it on Earth, possibly while bathing? And your theory is that the pond got bored ... Time will add DNA, as DNA is a storage media from our future, that was left here in our past... (Ponds don't get bored.) I'm glad that you revealed a new element of your Intelligent Design "Theory". You could call it the "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" theory. Since you can't seem to coherently encapsulate what your "theory/hypothesis" of ID is, in a few sentences or dozens of pictures, let me see if I have this straight. Life in our universe continues to evolve per DNA instructions, until a god-like being evolves, who goes back in time, to leave DNA, in order for life to begin. Paradoxically, this Intelligent Designer won't even need to create DNA, as it already exists, in the future. You may be on to something. Let's call all of the school districts in the USA to let them know to start teaching this in biology classes because it is so much more logical... ...On second thought, my future self just informed me that my first thought was ridiculous.
When you run the line of time forward, and simply speculate that humanity will soon be doing experiments in having life take hold on planets and moons in our own solar system, then what is an intelligent designer becomes far clearer, and as quoted somewhere, the image of man, is created in the image of God. This is not a biblical argument, it is a scientific one, as the bible never once mentioned hard drives.http://standupforamerica.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/spock-logic-begninning.jpg?w=320&h=256The Vulcan Science Academy has determined that time travel is illogical because of the Grandfather Paradox. Didn't you get the memo? What does that mean anyway, to "run the line of time forward"? You mean imagine what you THINK might happen?
Just to keep this thread from getting too messed up. that’s a quote from Coral Star. He posted every day for a month and now he’s been gone for a week. Kind of a one-hit wonder.
Just to keep this thread from getting too messed up. that's a quote from Coral Star. He posted every day for a month and now he's been gone for a week. Kind of a one-hit wonder.FWIW after giving several unheeded warnings we decided to ban coral star.
FWIW after giving several unheeded warnings we decided to ban coral star.I can nothing but agree. In the beginning he really tried to argue, but at some moment he gave up, and was just disturbing, contaminating many threads with the same kind of postings: big pictures, because he found out we find it annoying. Look at the attachment... From the philosophy forum.
FWIW after giving several unheeded warnings we decided to ban coral star.Thank you.
And I thought I had defeated him with my brilliant counter-logic.
Ok this guy is kind of humorous, and correct. Although, I am not sure that he knows the maximum length of a sentence. How does Darwinian evolution explain that humans have more genes in common with the mouse, than with the great apes? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1jPSN-cY-w Well if CNN says so, it's got to be true. http://edition.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/12/04/coolsc.coolsc.mousegenome/You obviously have no understanding of DNA. The pig and its cousin the wild boar share a lot with humans. They are world travellers and they are easy to seduce (with food). But there is more: a new analysis of their DNA reveals some unexpected and potentially beneficial similarities with humans, further supporting the pig as a valuable biomedical model. “These two research studies demonstrate the benefits of basic genomic research on agricultural animals and their closest living relatives. The new analysis has important implications for agriculture, and also contributes to our understanding of evolution and to the advancement of human medicine", explains ERC grantee Prof. Groenen from the University of Wageningen, The Netherlands. http://erc.europa.eu/succes-stories/footsteps-darwin-pigs-dna-sheds-light-evolution-and-selection Oink!
Just to keep this thread from getting too messed up. that's a quote from Coral Star. He posted every day for a month and now he's been gone for a week. Kind of a one-hit wonder.FWIW after giving several unheeded warnings we decided to ban coral star. Thanks, but one thing you could have done short of banning would be to put him on moderation with a notice that posts with pictures would be rejected. Isn't there a forum setting that would reject pictures without permission to post? Lois
Isn't there a forum setting that would reject pictures without permission to post?No.
Just to keep this thread from getting too messed up. that's a quote from Coral Star.Oops! When I quoted him I had to edit out Tim's comment but somehow his identifier got left in. Corrected now I hope.
In the evolution of the dissemination of ideas on this forum, some forms are selected out by the current contingencies. Let us have a moment of silence for all of those who have gone the way of the Dodo bird…
… (That’s enough. There is no sound on this forum, anyway.)
Goodbye Coral Star. Wherever you are, may your outlandish ideas be vigorously confronted (and may your graphics remain in the margins).
In the evolution of the dissemination of ideas on this forum, some forms are selected out by the current contingencies. Let us have a moment of silence for all of those who have gone the way of the Dodo bird... ............................................................................ (That's enough. There is no sound on this forum, anyway.) Goodbye Coral Star. Wherever you are, may your outlandish ideas be vigorously confronted (and may your graphics remain in the margins).The oversized photos annoyed me more than anything he had to say. His argumemts were inane. If we could have figured a way to prevent the photos from appearing, I wouldn't have minded continuing the debate. Lois