Evolution says -nothing- of stars and chemicals, for the 9001st time!
12/17/2007 3:17:41 PM
The Big Bang would be the beginning of matter in the universe coming to exist in the way it does today, not of the universe itself.
12/17/2007 3:24:04 PM
The Big Bang theory states that all matter was condensed into a small area, not that there was no matter. The chemical building blocks were there.
12/17/2007 3:35:29 PM
Of course, we don't have a computer, a car, antibiotics,..........and the NASA, of course.
12/17/2007 3:42:59 PM
Jezebel's Evil Sister
Stellar evolution? Chemical evolution? Oh, I get it -- just throw some scientific phrases together so you can fool the rubes into thinking you actually know what you're talking about. If you can't dazzle them with brillance, baffle them with bullshit.
YOU have nothing.
12/17/2007 3:46:11 PM
Yeah, I told Ptolemy about the stars and shit. Then I changed my mind and told Copernicus something different about the stars and shit. I changed my mind again and told Hubble and Hertzsprung and Chandra and all the others something reeeally different about the stars and shit.
12/17/2007 4:05:13 PM
Pile it higher and deeper, Istvan. See if you can make a skyscraper like your tower of babel.
12/17/2007 4:05:17 PM
Stars from naturally form from hydrogen accumulating gravitationally. Shall I continue?
Stars naturally create all of the heavier elements from hydrogen fusion. Shall I continue?
Amino acids, hydrocarbons, and water are found abundantly in space. Shall I continue?
It is predicted that protomembranes, helical and doulbe-helical molecules, and even more advances organic chemistry may take place commonly in space. Shall I continue?
Experimental studies indicate that amino acids in comets recombine into more complex peptides during a collision with a planetary body. Shall I continue?
Also, the interior of meterorites that survive to reach Earth's surface do not reach sterilizingly high temperatures. In other words, microbial life can be transferred easily between life-supporting worlds. Shall I continue?
The entire history of life on this planet can be described in natural terms from the very first single-celled organisms to the diversity of today's living things.
To take the unknown between all we know about life on Earth, and all we know about natural organic chemistry in space and on the early Earth, that one mystery of how the first life formed here or arrived here, and use it as an excuse to retreat into, of all things, biblical literalism, is the height of both ignorance and arrogance.
Shall I continue?
12/17/2007 4:16:39 PM
Make all the claims you want, it doesn't mean jack without support. It also helps to know what your opposition actually stands for.
12/17/2007 5:26:45 PM
What created god?
12/17/2007 5:46:59 PM
Yeah, it's easier not to think and say, "Goddidit".
12/17/2007 6:00:46 PM
Should we reject all medical knowledge because we still don't know how to cure cancer? Should we reject what we do know about cosmology because we don't know about the first few moments?
12/17/2007 6:07:33 PM
I guess you are completly unaware of the concept of "learning" When you study something, you gather new facts, you LEARN. Why should I continue. You utterly refuse to even try to do this thing that is so strange to you.
12/17/2007 6:24:44 PM
What a fundtard! Sad when watching reruns of Star Trek could improve this fundies knowledge of astronomy.... hell watching reruns of Gilligan's Island would help this one.
12/17/2007 7:23:25 PM
funnily enough, "istvaan" is the name of a planet in warhammer 40k that got bombed and completely annihilated by people working for the chaos gods.
12/17/2007 8:12:56 PM
Observational evidence > Biblical "evidence"
12/17/2007 8:23:04 PM
Isty, baby. Your ravings are incoherent, and evolution has nothing to say about the creation of the universe. Nothing. It's a biological concept. Biology. You know. Living things.
12/17/2007 8:58:18 PM
Yeah, we got nuthin'. Well, y'know, except thousands of scientists performing thousands of experiments, any one of which could bring all of our current scientific knowledge crashing down around us (but, for some strange reason, hasn't yet). Testability: it works, byotch.
12/17/2007 9:01:54 PM
How about if we say "OK, we admit we don't know where the universe originally came from; and so maybe for all we know there was some kind of god or gods who created one or more universes, perhaps anew, or perhaps out of pieces of another previous universe; and maybe the god or gods are still around (or not); and maybe the god or gods look like us, or maybe they look like a wad of flying spaghetti and meatballs". Will that make Istvan happy, or will he finally come to the same conclusion people smarter than he came to 2,500 years ago, which is "first cause arguments" are theologically useless?
12/17/2007 10:22:24 PM
It's CSE folks, lots of hot air and nothing of value(if they had brains would they follow a federally convicted liar and cheat?). They have worse than nothing, they have lying fraud!
12/18/2007 1:02:07 AM
If we are masters of the universe, where's He-Man?
12/18/2007 5:43:13 AM
and here we are now “masters of the universe”
"BY THE POWER OF GREYSKULL!"
or "THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!"
take your pick :)
12/18/2007 11:34:26 AM
12/18/2007 12:23:31 PM
Hi, my name is Istvan, and I make blanket assertions about words I don't understand!
12/19/2007 7:41:39 AM