A big-bang theory gets a big boost: Evidence that vast cosmos was created in split second

[zombie]

Isn't the story that God created the universe from nothing? Yet you want to argue that the universe cannot come about by natural causes?

God is not natural and god created the universe from his will.

 

[Jabu_Rule]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

 

[zombie]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

 

[Bodhi]

Isn't the story that God created the universe from nothing? Yet you want to argue that the universe cannot come about by natural causes?

God is not natural and god created the universe from his will.

..out of what? Nothing.

The Biblical account has always been that god created the world ex nihilo.

 

[whar]

The thing is their is nothing 'magical' that separates life from non-life. The hydrogen atoms that make up you and me are the same atoms in the heart of of star.

 

[Jabu_Rule]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

 

[zombie]

The thing is their is nothing 'magical' that separates life from non-life. The hydrogen atoms that make up you and me are the same atoms in the heart of of star.

No the fuck sign.

 

[Bodhi]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

 

[zombie]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

 

[Jabu_Rule]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

Yes, why use the material in such a way to force us into a pattern of continuous consumption to stay alive? Seems pointless as a goal for perfect creation in the likeness of a God.

 

[zombie]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

You hypocrite buddhist you probably never heard of abiogenesis before i brought it up.

The actually science behind abiogenesis has not proved life started from non-life. They can put all the minerals, gasses and amino acids together and cook them with radiation that they want too they still cannot produce the simplest cell of life.

 

[zombie]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

Yes, why use the material in such a way to make us an force us into a pattern of continuous consumption to stay alive. Seems pointless as a goal for perfect creation in the likeness of a God.

I can never tell you why god created the universe the way he did,

But actually when i think about it continuous consumption of life and non-life is a perfect system of life sustainability. We are the food of future life and we consume the life and non-life that life of the past was composed of.

 

[Bodhi]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

you probably never heard of abiogenesis before i brought it up.

prove it.

Its well documented that you've been the student on a great number of topics discussed between the two of us. You should humble yourself.

 

[Jabu_Rule]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

Yes, why use the material in such a way to make us an force us into a pattern of continuous consumption to stay alive. Seems pointless as a goal for perfect creation in the likeness of a God.

I can never tell you why god created the universe the way he did,

But actually when i think about it continuous consumption of life and non-life is a perfect system of life sustainability. We are the food of future life and we consume the life and non-life that life of the past was composed of.

That doesn't sound like a perfect system to me. Sounds like to many steps in a process. Perfect to me would be never requiring consumption and having a body that can never be injured or loose form. Of course, you would loose adaptation at that point, but perfect wouldn't require a need to adapt. We would work out of the box in all environments. Matter fact, perfect is having spring day and never experiencing a Winter.

 

[zombie]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

you probably never heard of abiogenesis before i brought it up.

prove it.

Its well documented that you've been the student on a great number of topics discussed between the two of us. You should humble yourself.

I can't prove it nor do i care too. I have no problem being humble but i won't stand for bullshit

 

[zombie]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

Yes, why use the material in such a way to make us an force us into a pattern of continuous consumption to stay alive. Seems pointless as a goal for perfect creation in the likeness of a God.

I can never tell you why god created the universe the way he did,

But actually when i think about it continuous consumption of life and non-life is a perfect system of life sustainability. We are the food of future life and we consume the life and non-life that life of the past was composed of.

That doesn't sound like a perfect system to me. Sounds like to many steps in a process. Perfect to me would be never requiring consumption and having a body that can never be injured or loose form. Of course, you would loose adaptation at that point, but perfect wouldn't require a need to adapt. We would work out of the box in all environments. Matter fact, perfect is having spring day and never experiencing a Winter.

Nothing is wrong with death and being immortal the way you described it would be a huge imperfection and would also be limiting. Your idea of perfection is stagnation and would lead to real overpopulation and laziness.

 

[Jabu_Rule]

You guys are discounting what rocks are actually made of. If rocks (or minerals) weren't important, then wouldn't consume Iron, silver, sulfar, phosphorus, magnesium etc as a part of our natural diet.

No one is disputing their importance, i am discounting the claim that life originated from the process called abiogenesis.

That's just my point. How can you discount such a thing when it is obvious that we are made up of the same materials that you claim to be simple rocks.

Life being composed of many elements is clear but those things coming together by themselves to create a self producing organism is one of the problems with abiogenesis.

Why use those same elements then? Why the convoluted process of requiring a continuation of their use to stay alive? You don't know the process entirely to discount it. What is accurate is that some how those things did come together and we still need to consume more of those things to keep together.

Are you seriously asking me why life was made the way it is? Lol. Non-life does not eat non-life only life consumes non-life to keep on living. life needing to consume non life does not explain the genesis of life.

Yes, why use the material in such a way to make us an force us into a pattern of continuous consumption to stay alive. Seems pointless as a goal for perfect creation in the likeness of a God.

I can never tell you why god created the universe the way he did,

But actually when i think about it continuous consumption of life and non-life is a perfect system of life sustainability. We are the food of future life and we consume the life and non-life that life of the past was composed of.

That doesn't sound like a perfect system to me. Sounds like to many steps in a process. Perfect to me would be never requiring consumption and having a body that can never be injured or loose form. Of course, you would loose adaptation at that point, but perfect wouldn't require a need to adapt. We would work out of the box in all environments. Matter fact, perfect is having spring day and never experiencing a Winter.

Nothing is wrong with death and being immortal the way you described it would be a huge imperfection and would also be limiting. Your idea of perfection is stagnation and would lead to real overpopulation and laziness.

If you are immortal, you wouldn't need kids. People create things every day even as they approach impending death. We are always attempting to get over an obstacle. If that wasn't our cause, then we would be content with letting the earth do with us as it will. Humans natural concern to wonder would still drive us. We would also have no concern for death and know pure nirvana in our current forms. All the other things we do now seems like a lot of struggle and if we were satisfied with it as a perfect system, we wouldn't look for ways around it.

 

[Bodhi]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

you probably never heard of abiogenesis before i brought it up.

prove it.

Its well documented that you've been the student on a great number of topics discussed between the two of us. You should humble yourself.

I can't prove it nor do i care too.

then you should have kept that comment to yourself. Try to have a mature conversation today without all the unnecessary bs

 

[Bodhi]

..out of what? Nothing.

The Biblical account has always been that god created the world ex nihilo.

 

[zombie]

These guys are used to the kind of oversimplification that the Bible is saturated with and want to view actual science the same way. That is why its so difficult for them to comprehend a simple article and say things like life came from rocks or single cell organisms decided to turn into giraffes.

you probably never heard of abiogenesis before i brought it up.

prove it.

Its well documented that you've been the student on a great number of topics discussed between the two of us. You should humble yourself.

I can't prove it nor do i care too.

then you should have kept that comment to yourself. Try to have a mature conversation today without all the unnecessary bs

Me calling you a hypocrite is pertinent to the conversation because you cannot propose that what i believe is less worthy of consideration or irrational meanwhile you hold beliefs that are also not rational. As you say, we have had many other discussions about similar topics in the past and being that you have never brung up abiogenesis in any of these conversions, is it logical for me to assume that you never knew about the theory.