People reject evolution

If you think creationism is good science, please provide the evidence. Provide a method of testing it. If you cannot, it's not science.

One of my friends was born with a tail.

Ever heard of DNA analysis?

I'm not arguing for creationism. You are arguing for abiogenesis. To prove it you can't say "well, if you can't prove creationism then it had to be abiogenesis". You have to provide evidence for your theory, and try to falsify it.

Yes, and?

No, I'm arguing evolution. Try again.

Aaaand you would see, and I would see, if we were both trained in DNA analysis, that the genetic information of microbes change from generation to generation.

Microbes are the easiest to see evolution on because they have such short generational timespans.

Y'know, its arguements like this that give Christianity a bad name. Creation is not related to science either. In fact, science is against it: Energy converts to mass and back again, and nothing is lost in the process; every proton, neutron, electron can be accounted for...at least the last time I checked. So, following this logic, nothing can be Created...

Wait, here's a thought, Kevn! Creationism *is* Abiogenesis!

*listens carefully when Kevn reads that*

You hear that, folks? That's the sound of a paradigm shifting without a clutch.

wait for it, wait for it


but but but.......blah blah blah....... your wrong because the bible tells me so

That may be true if you are in time and space. The problem is you can't conceive of existence not bound by time or space. You can't conceive of a plain where creatures exist beyond the realm we occupy. My assumption based on the information available is the creator/s aren't bound by the laws of physics. That would make your logic become illogical from the perspective of the other dimension.

The cold is still a cold, even with the short life span.

That would suggest that God is a being in another dimension.

However, if the universe is a closed system (see Christians using Second Law of THermodynamics in Apologetics to see why I mention this), it would be impossible for God to interact with our dimension if in another dimension. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a closed system.

So either God obeys rules God created and exists within the system, God is not with us at all right now, or the Universe is an open system.

The cold now is not the cold it once was.

But it's still a cold.

Can we all just start attacking Kevn personally so this troll's thread will be closed? Please?

From your prospective that's correct. But from the other dimension it's not correct. There is no way to know what the other dimensions are or how they operate. SL is a closed system, yet I, as the controller of my AV, can reach in and cause changes. LL can step in and change anything at all, or even close it forever. We still exist. The closed system of SL would be gone along with our AV and creations.

I'm going to keep saying this, Kevn, because you keep demonstrating it to be true: Your version of science is not an accurate one. There is no such thing as "scientific fact". There is data (observed phenomenon, measurements, chemical compounds and reactions) and then there are theories which seek to explain that data. And in NO case is science EVER complacent enough to claim that it has all the final "facts" -- it is always provisional, based on the discovery of additional evidence (data) or a better explanation (theory). Science, in other words, is a method. It's a way for us to interpret what we find in Nature and the Universe.


Sure it can. It should trouble you just a little that over 50 years ago, Stanley Miller successfully created amino acids in the laboratory using nothing more complex than brine and electrical current. His experiment was not scalable, but it remains a very valid example of what probably occurred somewhere in the whole process. Really, Kevn, the LAST thing you ever want to do is tell Science it cannot ever do something. Every time, you will eventually be shown wrong.


First of all, what is your proposal for an alternative? Magical conjuration from thin air? Second, we already know enough about the mechanisms of nature to see that nothing in Nature ever happens without exploiting and utilizing those basic natural mechanisms -- why should abiogenesis be any different?

In fact, what would ever lead us to believe that the universe is not amok with Life, and that the Earth is really not all that special in the Cosmic scheme of things? Did your god run around specially planting all those microbes on billions of planets? Or could he have been a smart god and just written the initial program that allows chemical compounds to work together and in some cases, in the right circumstances, result in self-replicating forms of life?

Some time ago, I offered you a plethora of links to current research being done on abiogenesis. You, of course, chose to ignore them out of intellectual cowardice. I'm not offering to post them again -- do your own damned legwork this time before you speak on something you obviously know very little about.


EDIT: How is Creation testable? It's not, Kevn, and never will be. You're being so disingenious and deluded it's not even funny any more.


Simple: Taking Stanley Miller's experiments one step further, when scientists figure out the mechanism for creating cellular structures and replicate it in the laboratory you can have a whole can of STFU. Fact is, we have already found cell-like membrane structures in comet ice exposed to UV radiation. There are natural mechanisms which CAN make it happen. What will you say then?

Answer: Not much. You'll just run away (again) and change tactics. Like always. Next time you come to a gun fight, please bring something bigger than a spatula.

A cold is the description of the symptoms, and considering one symptom used to be death before human bodies evolved in a manner that protected better against it, yes, the cold has changed.

The germs involved have changed. Change = adaptation if it's the same specimen. Repeated and progressive adaptation over generations = evolution.

SL is an open system because you as the controller of your AV, can reach in and cause changes.

You've never taken statistical mechanics, I can see.

Refuted because, by definition, that would make the universe an Open System.

An open system accepts input from outside that system. That's essentially the definition of it. If another dimension is able to influence our own, regardless of the rules of that dimension, that means our dimension is an open system, as it is accepting input.

SL is also an Open System. The ability for players to input data, as well as any influences our RL's have on SL play, including the affects LL projects in the environment as maintenance and development, makes it an Open System.

I tried to explain it to him in another thread with a wonderfully cute story about 5 and 6-toed cats, but his response was, something along the lines of "No, I mean something like a fish turning into a bird". He has no interest in either learning or debate.

I'll give you 100$L if you can get him to understand Maxwell's demon.

Noun 1. scientific fact - an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and is accepted as true (although its truth is never final)
observation - facts learned by observing; "he reported his observations to the mayor"

It is a generation later. But it's a different type of microbe.

Given twenty, thirty, a thousand, three thousand generations, isn't it conceivable that it will be a completely different lifeform?

LOL a fish turning into a bird? Now that is a bit proposterous, and noone has ever claimed anything evolved along such unreasonable lines.

I recall fish->amphibian, Amphibian -> Reptilian and Mammalian.

Well, and the more common fish->misused and tired religious iconery.