Gotcha. So all we have to do is believe in the much more likely scenario that a deity created everything in 6 days, then manifested himself as a man and sacrificed himself to save us from an eternal punishment he created but only if we believe in him and do what his earthly representatives say.
Of course, this leaves the problem of which of his earthly representatives we should obey, since they all say something different. And that's not even getting onto the problem of which creator deity to believe in.
6/28/2012 3:58:22 PM
"...raise a pretty high wall..."
We don't need no education...
6/28/2012 4:16:29 PM
Do something useful.
6/28/2012 4:26:42 PM
The initial oxygen was mostly bonded to carbon (CO2), hydrogen(H2O)or to the hot minerals when the earth was forming, that's why most of the earth's crust is magnesium silicate (MgSiO3), ferrous oxide (rusty iron, FeO), aluminum oxide (Al2O3) or silicon dioxide (SiO2).
Only after the emergence of blue green algae did oxygen levels return to teh levels we enjoy today.
This depends on teh fallacy that ozone is the only molecule in existence that can block ultraviolet rays. Did you ever notice that you don't get sunburnt on cloudy days? The steamy seas of early earth would have provided increased increased cloud cover and water vapor while volcanic activity would have deflected ultraviolet light with increased ash cloud output.
Early life would have started in murky, mineral rich water, akin to the black water spewing out of volcanic vents at the bottom of the ocean.
There are many places UV light would have no effect on pre-life chemical synthesis.
6/28/2012 4:29:03 PM
I have to give you credit: you actually know something about science. You aren't nearly as stupid as most people on here.
I'm sure you're wrong, though I myself don't know enough to say where the error in your reasoning lies. The reason I know you're wrong is that if you actually could disprove existing scientific theories, you would have published this information in a scientific journal, whereupon you would be hailed as a revolutionary scientific visionary. Instead you peddle your religion. Speaks volumes.
6/28/2012 5:02:20 PM
We agree that faith is bad.
6/28/2012 5:20:10 PM
That is not how biology works. You fail.
6/28/2012 6:35:29 PM
Patently, it is impossible to form reasonable thoughts in the presence of Rapture Ready.
6/28/2012 6:53:24 PM
Oh, so THAT'S why God created plants before He created the sun, or even the distinction between day and night (on the fourth "day", when he did the sun-moon thing). This must be the sophisticated theology I keep hearing about. I can't wait to hear how the proteins that formed afterward became fish and birds, then domesticated animals, then wild animals before He finally got around to creating a man out of dirt.
6/28/2012 7:28:38 PM
You're right, we can't have ozone without oxygen. Here's the thing, oxygen is an insanely unstable element, it likes to bond with as many possible things as it can. That's why it's so good for starting fires. Now all of the oxygen on Earth that existed prior to abiogenesis was in either the form of water, carbon dioxide or ozone, those are all forms that oxygen really likes to become left to it's own devices. So there was oxygen on Earth before life, there was just no free oxygen, it was bound up in either of those molecules.
This is why abiogenesis theory posits that the first life forms were autotrophes, like plants. They took in carbon dioxide and breathed out oxygen. When the amount of free floating oxygen in the atmosphere exploded cells evolved to take advantage of it, and the first heterotrophes where born.
Sorry, there is nothing in your rant that scientists haven't already thought of, and accounted for.
6/28/2012 10:30:04 PM
A crack in the wall of analytical thinking?
Are you reading what you're writing? Why would you want to do that?
I'm no expert, but wasn't the atmosphere pretty void of oxygen at first, and then there came an explosion of oxygen and 95% of all life died out.
An analytical person like you ought to know that Evolution is only about diversity and adaptation of life, not the origin of life. With regards to Evolution, there might well have been a deity saying "Fiat lux" and create all life, and then jump-start evolution as a means for life to take care of itself from then on.
Creation is indeed fantastic; it doesn't explain anything whatsoever, on the contrary; it creates even more questions.
6/28/2012 11:02:09 PM
"I believe in Stan Lee, the Writer Almighty,
Creator of Marvel and Timely,
I believe in Peter Parker, his Spider-man, our Hero.
Conceived by the power of the quick buck, and born of the art of Steve Ditko,
suffered under Norman Osbourne, was exploded, died and buried.
In the third edition he rose again ..."
6/29/2012 12:24:39 AM
Pre-med students should understand that it is impossible for amino acids to form proteins in the presence of oxygen so there must have been no oxygen in the atmosphere when the first proteins were formed.
Yes, science has shown that the pre-biotic earth had an atmosphere without oxygen. The oxygen budget had yet to be churned out by cyano-bacteria. So?
In an atmosphere with no oxygen there is no ozone.
To quote wikipedia: The majority of tropospheric ozone formation occurs when nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as xylene, react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight.
So no O2 is required for the production of ozone.
Since the rest of your argument is based on the falsehood that ozone production requires oxygen, you fail.
6/29/2012 12:34:30 AM
DAFUQ did I just read?
6/29/2012 3:02:22 AM
> One way to help them to hear His Word is to put a couple of plausible cracks in that wall.
Okay. Just don't complain when people ignore you.
The chances are, you'd also go in la-la-can't-hear-you mode when someone else points out a few "plausible cracks" in His Word(tm).
However, those evul evolutionists can usually find out scientific evidence why you are wrong. You, on the other hand, have a lot less wriggle room when people point the challenges in your theory.
6/29/2012 5:11:30 AM
Even if we hypothetically assume that life is the result of some sort of divine intervention, or the work of some outside intelligent agent, who is to say that such an agent was specifically the Christian god?
The ball is in your court, Christers.
6/29/2012 8:29:41 PM
An analytical mind that ignores oceans, tide pools, swamps, marshes, caves and crevices in the various ground and rocks?
Analytical suggest one has looked into things in depth, what you've done is the complete opposite. You've assumed it's impossible and invented a world where it can't occur by ignoring the many sources that existed. A typical creationist tactic.
Then ending your nonsense with the inevitable "therefor God" closer. Ignoring options again because if there were a creator why would it have to be your God and not one of the hundreds of others?
6/30/2012 7:48:12 AM
David F Mayer
It was the ultraviolet light combined with soluble phosphate that did the trick. Polypeptides, polysaccharides, and polynucleotides are all thermodynamically unstable in water. That means that they all move in the direction of hydrolysis and depolymerization. Ultraviolet light accelerates this reaction.
However, soluble phosphate is rapidly converted to polyphosphate by ultraviolet light. Polyphosphate reacts with polypeptides, polysaccharides, and polynucleotides and water to push the reaction towards, not away from further polymerization. The constant production of polyphosphate via UV light forced the synthesis of larger and larger molecules faster than the rate of hydrolysis, driving the system away from thermodynamic equilibrium. This has been confirmed by numerous laboratory tests.
So, while what you said is basically correct in the absence of polyphosphate, there was plenty of polyphosphate to force polymerization. No supernatural explanation is required.
12/16/2012 9:51:19 PM