₦airaland Forum

UyiIredia:
Doesn't demonstrate RNA self-assembly. The researchers started out with RNA molecules and controlled their assembly to form tecto-RNA's. Try again.

Excerpt from the link provided.

UyiIredia:
No, it can't.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1390682/?_e_pi_=7%2CPAGE_ID10%2C6657899968

KingEbukasBlog:
Stop lying for atheism

If you could read them you'd probably have been able to deduce that I spoke for myself.

False. I'm an atheist and I never discriminate. Even if the person's beliefs differ or the person happens to be gay or whatever. As long as you're not hurting others, I'm cool with you.

I also don't make uninformed generalizations.

hopefulLandlord:
Hahahahahahahahaha

you can create a thread on it

Maybe...just maybe.

UyiIredia:
No, it can't. As I've explained DNA possesses a code. Code requires foresight to build as it involves symbolic representation. This is why an intelligent designer is required as nature lacks foresight.

But a code doesn't require foresight. RNA is a code but it can self-assemble under the right conditions.

We can find Jesus' failed prophecies in Matthew 24:3-34, Mark 9:1, and Luke 9:27.

UyiIredia:
Not just complexity. Specified complexity. God doesn't need to be complex to produce complexity. Even in abiogenesis and evolution the processes the generate increasingly complexity are relatively simple. Again you use poor reasoning.

So if you don't need complexity to produce complexity. Then DNA can exist without a designer.

UyiIredia:
Snowflakes and crystals don't have codes and it would be completely asinine to say they do. So they are not as complex as DNA. Furthermore, God is immaterial so you cannot attribute material complexity to him.

That's special pleading that makes no logical sense. It is nothing but a cop-out that throws all logic out the window. Whether material or not, you said that complexity cannot exist without a designer.

If complexity cannot be attributed to God then complexity cannot come from it. It makes no sense.

Hence, we can say that complexity needs no designer.

TheSixthSense:
Comparing the complexity of a snowflake with the DNA is the height of intellectual buffoonery. There is even no intellect here to begin with. Such a doofus. You really need an education. So if the DNA was intelligently designed (How can it not be?) the next logical question to you is who created the designer? Some of you are not even worth a byte of data.

DNA is a product of molecular self- assembly.

These guys up here aren't trying to have a conversation. Do you really think that they'd accept your point? They can't come up with a decent argument so they start trying to nit-pick.

Here's the thing: snowflakes and crystals are complex structures. DNA itself is a product of molecular self-assembly. There really isn't any argument here.

Also, going by creationist logic, how can a complex designer exist without a designer itself? If it can't then the argument is meaningless; if it can, then that means they agree that complex structures can exist without a designer making the argument meaningless.

Either way, the argument is meaningless.

KingEbukasBlog:
Progressive creationism has not stopped . The last act of creation I suppose will come very soon . Sooner than I thought .

Macro-evolution has never been observed .

But what about ask the appreciation speciation that we've observed?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/?_e_pi_=7%2CPAGE_ID10%2C3082710436

Your theory is dead in the water.

I'm done here...again.

UyiIredia:
And ? Is the cranium not large.

Does the human cranium have an indented forehead? Do the human eye sockets have such protrusion? Look at the cheekbone to jaw ratio of the two. Look at the balloon-y skull of the human. Everyone can now see your dishonesty.

I'm done here...

UyiIredia:
And that says Genetics is based on universal common ancestry. Bros, you blind ?

Genetics deals with heredity, the more similar the DNA sequence, the more closely related they are. Simple.

Of course it was my fault for expecting you to know this.

UyiIredia:
The last one clearly has a large cranium like humans.

Affixed to the post will be the skunk you are taking about closely forward by the skull of a homo sapien.

UyiIredia:
I've read it. And nowhere does it say genetics is based on universal common ancestry. You should say cladistics.

Um...

UyiIredia:
'Genetics is based on Universal Common Ancestry.' LOL.

I know you won't follow this link but here goes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent?_e_pi_=7%2CPAGE_ID10%2C1628326578

UyiIredia:
No, it doesn't. In fact, some of the fossils Lennycool showed resembles humans.

That's complete hogwash. Those skulls lack the giant cranium to house a human brain. The reason they resemble humans is due to common ancestry.

UyiIredia:
Universal common ancestry has never been observed and cannot be observed. The very idea is bogus.

Genetics is based on Universal Common Ancestry. Your point is straight-up false.

KingEbukasBlog:
Is this science section ?

Anyway , Lennycool , fossils are also evidence of progressive creationism

Evolution has been observed while creationism hasn't.

Also, why did progressive creationism stop?

UyiIredia:
Of course you think so. You believe in evolution so you paint the data with your presumprtions. Those fossils don't definitively prove human evolution. The parsimonious conclusion would be that they are a unique species.

The assumption is easy to disprove, bring a human fossil from 3 million years ago and ask this evidence counts for nothing.

The fact that nothing like that has ever been found just gives credence to the veracity of the theory.

KingEbukaNaija:
Over 99.8 percent of Nairalanders who are religious seeing "Religious folks are extremely ridiculous" won't be offended ? All your doing is trying to extenuate that OP's offence by saying everyone deserves equal opportunity. Every one deserves equal opportunity to overtly insult people or denigrate their religious views ?

I don't think the ignorant OP even understands that some atheists also admit to the existence of the supernatural - witches , evil spirits , voodoo - and that atheism is just the rejection of gods .

When you said that all atheists have murderous tendencies, did your post get removed?

KingEbukaNaija:
You rarely have a full grasp of the subject matter and you are always quick to react .

Look at Muafrika2's post and understand what is being discussed .

Why is OP talking about when Christianity is ridiculed? Stop trying to obfuscate the real problem. The admin is an atheist and suddenly he likes to ridicule religion because of what users say? The truth is that posts like that hardly ever got to the front page before and now that they do, people are calling that equal opportunity a bad thing. Give me a break!

You don't have to respond to every comment of mine.

Seun put the religious section. An atheist put up a religious section, showing his open-mindedness. Atheists then saw a safe space to air their views (which would be very difficult or impossible in most cases), node Christians don't want to see dissenting opinions.

OP said that we should be allowed to go at each other on the religious section but atheists shouldn't expires their views on religious belief in other sections. That should be sensible of no other person is allowed to talk about God, Allah, or whatever you believe in. That would be fair.

It's funny that people on this thread are talking about religious bullying/hate when what OP is advocating is a restriction that only applies to atheists.

It's also funny that he's implicitly complaint that atheist posts have an equal opportunity have making it to the front page (something that was not the case just a few weeks back). How many threads did atheists open to complain about this?

This is why I feel the need to speak out. How can people say it's unfair when you begin to treat a certain group as equals to them?

Lennycool, great job, you've done a fantastic job of answering OP's questions without getting too technical.

OP, it you have any free time, you should check this site out:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php

That is an excellent and in-depth resource on evolution and related processes.

winner01:
This right here is too much anger coming from one man

You're repeating yourself now. Could it really be that *gasp* you've been out-trolled?

analice107:
Really enh, you are one guy who i have noticed to always be unruffled, but this evening, you are different, what piqued you up?

Or you probably just don't like what I'm saying.

analice107:
Why are you so angry? Say it, I'm not angry.

lol, all that venom is coming from a calm mind right?

You know, a responsible, well-adjusted member of society might try to assure you that he's having bucket loads of fun right now.

That is not me.

KingEbukasBlog:
You didn't read this write up young man .

Go to bed

I see an ally from the Bushido is here to help. Maybe you should be using that energy to remind your brother how to troll successfully once again.

A fall does not make a man...

winner01:
You are still very angry.....You're not thinking clearly. You need to go get something to eat...

This is exactly what I'm talking about, you've said that I'm angry and you've locked on to that. Nothing I say will ever sway that because you are not confined by logic and common sense like some other losers would be. No, you will stick to you guns even if they misfire and kill your family.

Thus is the way of the troll...

The way of the winner...

The way of Winner01...

winner01:
I can post anything i feel like until seun decides to finally ban me for life

But seriously dude, you still sound angry. And you dont have to be.

That's exactly what I'm saying. That's why I'm telling you to troll like you normally do, it's what makes you Winner01. People like me go through trouble to provide reputable citations and sources and all that fuccboi nonsense but you and your gang don't care about that, you can proudly say outlandish things without any reasonable source and try to make people scramble to find refutations of such claims that don't even deserve time of day and then declare yourself the winner.

Today's post lacked that effortless vibe of a true circlejerk post. It gets a 2.5/10.