Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,195,423 members, 7,958,270 topics. Date: Wednesday, 25 September 2024 at 11:34 AM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / A Question For The Atheists (10028 Views)
The Atheists Test / The Best Of The Atheists In Nairaland So Far / To All The Atheists (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 4:52am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: Which one is this single life theory? It is called the theory of evolution......... Go and read 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 6:41am On Oct 18, 2014 |
MacCantStopMe Which one is this single life theory? I asked how did life begin; how can humans, animals trace their origin; you came up with the "first life" statement It is called the theory of evolution Exactly what it is - A THEORY. When you get the chance, read up the definition of a theory. There is a BIG difference between a scientific theory and a theory? Not only that; the evolution theory doesn't follow any known scientific laws. That is why it amazes me when folks talk about evolution theory as if it's a proven scientific law or fact. When rubbish is repeated often especially by so called "intellectuals"; the ignorant and gullible followers, drop their brains, drop their reasoning and go along with the "experts" advice. So, I will ask you one more time - can you prove scientifically using your theory of evolution how life began without requiring faith or belief. |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 7:09am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: Let me help you with some facts that you have just opposed in your comments 1) Evolution starts after the first life (or lives). It has nothing to do with the origin of the first living organism. Evolution is a process of life and not the other way round. Life first, then evolution. 2) No one knows how the first life or living organisms came about 3) Evolution is a scientific theory!!!! It is one of the most challenged scientific theories which has stood its ground. 4) Go and read. 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 8:19am On Oct 18, 2014 |
MacCantStopMe 1) Evolution starts after the first life (or lives). It has nothing to do with the origin of the first living organism. Evolution is a process of life and not the other way round. Life first, then evolution. Can you please explain how the first life came about i.e. what was it's origin? Whilst you are working on your "first life" theory - please try and align it with the laws of bio-genesis 2) No one knows how the first life or living organisms came about Of course you don't that is why it's a theory. More importantly, you believe it yet can't use any scientific method to prove it; do you know what that is called? BLIND FAITH. There is no known scientific laws that can support this argument - all the more shocking that you will claim it's scientific. 3) Evolution is a scientific theory!!!! It is one of the most challenged scientific theories which has stood its ground. If one is patient with you evolutionist; you will always shoot yourself in the foot. You just claimed that no one knows the origin of first life which is an evolution theory yet you call it a scientific theory. A scientific theory can be OBSERVED and it's claims or predictions TESTED. Can you please reconcile how we can test your "first life" scientific theory? 4) Go and read. Go and read what exactly - the proponents of evolution or the opponents of it? All I am asking you to do is provide proof that it is scientific. |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 8:45am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: Gone are the days that I would waste time explaining and linking to scientific sources for ignorant fellows like you. Go and read |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:03am On Oct 18, 2014 |
MacCantStopMe Gone are the days that I would waste time explaining and linking to scientific sources for ignorant fellows like you. I will say it again - if you don't have anything to say; sit down and shut-up. Every-time I asked you for specifics; you continue with your mantra that I should go and read. What kind of scientist will say - I don't know the origin of life BUT all the assumptions I have shows that it's scientific? Truly pathetic! |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:21am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis:life started from a simple reproducing organism, the variation in species is caused by the variation in the distribution of heritable traits which occurs when the organism reproduce and also through mutation over a period of billion of years in earth's case. which is essentially what evolution is mean 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 9:24am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: Origin of life and evolution are two different things entirely GO AND READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:30am On Oct 18, 2014 |
MacCantStopMe Origin of life and evolution are two different things entirely I didn't claim they are the same but you can't explain one without the other. Evolution is based upon the origin of life expect you are from a different planet |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 9:31am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: #ignorance |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:32am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100: Was the simple reproducing organism created from non living organism or where they created from other organism? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:33am On Oct 18, 2014 |
One funny difference btw a theist and an atheist is ; an atheist will read the bible but the theist wouldn't read about science |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:39am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis:there wasn't any other organism, life gets simpler and simpler as we go back in time, and the most promising idea right now is that life evolved from chemistry. 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:40am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100: Is this a response to the question I asked above? There is nothing scientific about evolution because all of evolution claim doesn't hold up to scientific laws. Adherents of evolution require blind faith. For example; you claim life started with a simple organism; is that something we can observe or test? Also, how does that statement fit with the law of bio-genesis? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by MacCantStopMe: 9:41am On Oct 18, 2014 |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:41am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100: So life came from nothing? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:42am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis:if you want to say chemistry is nothing or chemical reaction is nothing, then no p 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:44am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100: You have to be specific. The study of Chemistry is not the study of living organism. Your claim sounds as if you are stating that life came from non living chemicals; Is that your statement? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:49am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis: yap life came from non living chemical which is something, and not nothing as you put the question in ur oda post alexis: 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 9:52am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100 yap life came from non living chemical which is something, and not nothing as you put the question in ur oda post Okay, this raises some questions: 1. How can you reconcile that non living chemicals produced living organism with the scientific law of bio-genesis? 2. Are you claiming your statement is scientific or an assumption? 3. Where did the non living chemicals come from? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 10:15am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis:Bio genesis says living comes from living...but it doesn't answer how the first living appeared, what this idea tries to achieve is just that. Bio genesis talks about biological evolution why this idea talks about chemical evolution alexis:This is the question you ought to ask first, if you looked at my previous post you would see I said the most promising idea right now is that life might have come from non living chemicals alexis:Science have the hints that life came from non living chemicals... But science still has many questions to answer like this one; and there are also many hypothesis available to answer it 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 10:25am On Oct 18, 2014 |
pesty100 Bio genesis says living comes from living...but it doesn't answer how the first living appeared, what this idea tries to achieve is just that. Bio genesis talks about biological evolution why this idea talks about chemical evolution Bio-genesis is a SCIENTIFIC LAW i.e. it is established in the entire scientific community. Scientifically, we know that non living things/chemicals can't produce living organisms. Your claim of the first living thing from chemicals is an IDEA, it has no scientific basis This is the question you ought to ask first, if you looked at my previous post you would see I said the most promising idea right now is that life might have come from non living chemicals This has been my stand the entire time - evolution is based on blind faith and not on any scientific principles. You have confirmed that and honestly, thank you - other evolutionists here don't have the balls to be this honest Science have the hints that life came from non living chemicals... But science still has many questions to answer like this one; and there are also many hypothesis available to answer it Your entire statement is based on assumption but I appreciate your honestly. The theory of evolution is not a scientific one; it is based on assumptions and belief. Hence the reason, it shocks me when people talk about evolution as if it's proven. |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 10:52am On Oct 18, 2014 |
alexis:A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observations that describes some aspect of the universe. When a chemist by the name of Fredrick whooler accidentally produced urea in his lab without urine. It got scientists to think again that life might have been powered by normal chemical reactions. Chemist have been able to re-create numerous nucleus and cellular activities have been recreated in the lab... Suggesting further that life might have come from non chemicals alexis:Evolution isn't based on blind faith, it is a based on pure science, Check the earlier definition of evolution I gave you. alexis:To be frank some of my statements are based on assumption not all... Just read up on the theory of evolution 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 2:37am On Oct 19, 2014 |
pesty100 A scientific law is a statement based on I will assume you have some scientific background; let's be honest and not play semantics. You don't have to go to wikipedia to copy and paste the definition. A scientific law is a proven and tested phenomena that can be observed, tested and replicated. For example, we can test gravity with relative certainty. We can test and observe the laws of thermodynamics and bio-genesis because we can observe them, repeat them with certainty. Evolution is not even a scientific theory because the hypothesis brought forward can't be supported with any empirical data. It is a theory and that is where it ends. For example, you have stated clearly that you don't know how life began and evolution has no answer either. You are assuming that it began from chemical reactions when you have no empirical data to support this claim. We can't observe this phenomena, neither can we monitor it to deduce any experimental answers. All you are doing is repeating what others are saying; that is why it's called a THEORY; howbeit not a scientific one. When a chemist by the name of Fredrick whooler accidentally produced urea in his lab without urine. It got scientists to think again that life might have been powered by normal chemical reactions. Chemist have been able to re-create numerous nucleus and cellular activities have been recreated in the lab... Suggesting further that life might have come from non chemicals They didn't create living organisms from non living chemicals; if they did - they would have refuted the law of bio-genesis and we can both be sure that scientific laws are rarely or never refuted. Evolution isn't based on blind faith, it is a based on pure science, Check the earlier definition of evolution I gave you. If it was, why don't you know how and when living organisms came on the scene? Evolution is based on a theory but it's not scientific. You can't provide any empirical data of evidence that it's scientific. All you have done is provided assumptions i.e. it could have come from chemicals but I have no evidence; I don't know how it all started but I believe science will find the answers - these are your premises but they are based on faith To be frank some of my statements are based on assumption not all... Just read up on the theory of evolution I have taken evolution in college and in summary this is what my professor said - "If the experts said it was true; it's true". That sound no different than believing in a flying hippo |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 8:10am On Oct 19, 2014 |
alexis:An we can test evolution with certainty alexis:You shouldn't say we can't, you should say we haven't being able to. science evolves, and even we have been able to monitor the processes, though we haven't been able to re-create it, that doesn't mean recreating it is impossible. alexis:Science isn't rigid, read this wikipedia page a bit more en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law alexis:Evolution has been observed and it is still being observed alexis: Well the most funniest thing is that, the expert hasn't and wouldn't mention a flying hippo |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by alexis(m): 8:55am On Oct 19, 2014 |
pesty100 An we can test evolution with certainty If we can, you sure haven't been able to. I asked your evolution take on how life came about; you said you have no clue. You shouldn't say we can't, you should say we haven't being able to. science evolves, and even we have been able to monitor the processes, though we haven't been able to re-create it, that doesn't mean recreating it is impossible. This is where faith comes in; you believe in something that hasn't been proven yet. For example, you claim that we can get living organisms from non living chemical reactions. If this was the case; why aren't there multiple occurrences of this phenomena. Why can't simple life-forms pop up from random chemical reactions all over the place? Also, you can't argue from the impossible stand; scientist don't do that. It's like saying, you have an empty garage, you leave it for 50 years and come back and expect a brand new BMW to be in it. You wait for 100 years and there is nothing. Your generations wait for 100 million years and still there is nothing BUT somehow you believe the BMW will appear. All I am asking is for empirical evidence to support your theory and so far you have provided none Science isn't rigid, read this wikipedia page a bit more. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law When it comes to evolution; it doesn't comply with the laws of science; that is and has been my point Evolution has been observed and it is still being observed Can you provide empirical data and evidence of this observation? Well the most funniest thing is that, the expert hasn't and wouldn't mention a flying hippo You are right; the expert we have seen is someone that possesses blind faith |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 9:37am On Oct 19, 2014 |
alexis: I now see where you get it all wrong, evolution doesn't tell us how life began, what it tells us is how life became what it is now. alexis:I gave you instances that further strengthened my proposition. Faith is believing without proof, evolution has proofs... The instance I gave you were enough proof to tell us chemical evolution has a solid standing alexis:You re the one arguing from the impossibility stand say because it hasn't been done yet, then its impossible... In the case of the empty garage if you work hard for fifty years you will have enough money to put a bmw in the empty garage... Science is working towards chemical evolution, biological evolution has already being proven alexis:Evolution definitely comply with science... Or else it would have been discarded a long time ago alexis:Am not a scientist, but look at malaria you could once treat is with chloroquine, but now malaria is immune to chloroquine... This is where evolution comes in... How did malaria get immune to chloroquine alexis:Expert don't possess blind faith, experts have faith based on what they have experimented on. 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by Nobody: 9:46am On Oct 19, 2014 |
JEITO: Religion and the unproven existence of a supreme god has been imposed on all of us. It is only a reflex reaction to criticise and ridicule the idea. Show me the evidence of ur god and i will believe you. 1 Like |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by JEITO: 1:38pm On Oct 19, 2014 |
ifeness:you see! This is the challenge with atheist. Any way, let me ask you: what is you definition of what can be termed "an acceptable proof of the existence of God"? Maybe we can start from there |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by JEITO: 1:42pm On Oct 19, 2014 |
pesty100:who says theists don't read about science? Why do atheists read the Bible? Is it to find the truth in the scriptures or to find evidence to support their disbelieve? |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by joseph1832(m): 1:46pm On Oct 19, 2014 |
"Religion is the opiate of the people" Just like "Marxism is the opiate of the Marxist". Plain and simple. If you get my drift. |
Re: A Question For The Atheists by pesty100(m): 1:48pm On Oct 19, 2014 |
JEITO:well I tried to find truth... |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (Reply)
The Pope Is The Antichrist? / Fasting Because You Are Broke. Is It Acceptable Before God? / Roman Catholicism Is Idolatry And True Christianity Is Gnosis
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 136 |