Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

14 May 2009, 1:18 pm

Well, it has finally happened. Scientists have found that RNA (the precursor to all life on the planet) will spontaneously form under conditions likely to have been found on the young Earth. From there to all life on the planet is just a case of connecting up the dots.

None of this will worry creationists though. They are not interested in facts or science, just fairy tales.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

14 May 2009, 1:33 pm

Am I in any way bad for sneering at the Old Earth Creationists claiming that god was responsible for abiogenesis since science could not yet explain it? Well, I'll guess they won't learn anything, and continue pointing their fingers at Big Bang.

It's the god of the gaps, all right.


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


LostInEmulation
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,047
Location: Ireland, dreaming of Germany

14 May 2009, 1:42 pm

In my religious time, I thought that God was just the programmer who started the program, which now runs independently of him... and why he took the hassle of evolution, well, kkrieger is considered better programming than Doom because it needs less resources. :wink:

Awesome find!


_________________
I am not a native speaker. Please contact me if I made grammatical mistakes in the posting above.

Penguins cannot fly because what cannot fly cannot crash!


TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

14 May 2009, 2:11 pm

LostInEmulation wrote:
Awesome find!


Very exciting news indeed! The bottom line is of course that life will spontaneously form! No creator required.

I had puzzled a little why it was taking so long to discover that RNA would spontaneously form, but if you compare the size of a test tube against the size of the planet, then hitting the right conditions by chance in a laboratory is a hell of a lot harder than in nature where there is such a huge and wide variety of conditions in a very very big test tube! Of course once a self replicating strand of RNA occurred in the ancient oceans which were rich in organic chemicals, then it would reproduce exponentially and those variations better suited to replication or converting existing strands of RNA to their own constituency would soon dominate. The rest like they say is history. One place less for the "God of the gaps" to hide - and it has been used by lots of religionists as a big hideout!


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

14 May 2009, 2:17 pm

LostInEmulation wrote:
In my religious time, I thought that God was just the programmer who started the program, which now runs independently of him... and why he took the hassle of evolution, well, kkrieger is considered better programming than Doom because it needs less resources. :wink:

In other words: Deism...

Don't worry, I'm inclined to agree with that idea... It's easier to design the laws of physics and let them do all the hard work... Being a computer graphic artist, I know the value of running scripts to design my works...

If the reason the laws of physics are the way they are is ever discovered, then i'll be impressed...

PS: Anyone who throws Occam's Razor at me, I'll probably cut you with it... the premise itself is making an assumption, and is therefore is hypocritical...

Quote:
Awesome find!

I agree with that... and this is coming from a practicing christian...



Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

14 May 2009, 2:20 pm

I headed over to a creationist forum, and found this:

Quote:
I don't have a problem with this. If this is true, still I believe G-d is the one who started the process, it didn't just happen out of nowhere.


*sigh*

*goes and makes himself a cup of chocolate*


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

14 May 2009, 2:22 pm

Groovy.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 94
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

14 May 2009, 2:27 pm

Now, if you want to convince conservative religious people you have to discover a watch that constructed itself.



TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

14 May 2009, 2:39 pm

Sand wrote:
Now, if you want to convince conservative religious people you have to discover a watch that constructed itself.


Such people are a lost cause. They are beyond reason and logic, and mostly scientifically illiterate, not only about science but about the scientific process itself. They use ill formed analogies like the self constructing watch and feel smug in their comparison not realising they simply show their own ignorance of basic chemical reactions and physical principles such as positive and negative feedback within systems.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

14 May 2009, 2:47 pm

Sand wrote:
Now, if you want to convince conservative religious people you have to discover a watch that constructed itself.

Or explain what caused the Big Bang... Causality plays a major role in many fields, scientific and otherwise, but it fails at the point of the Big Bang, as that was an effect without cause... I would be impressed with an explanation of that, but then again, I'm not a conservative and I actually listen to scientific discoveries...



Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

14 May 2009, 2:49 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:
Sand wrote:
Now, if you want to convince conservative religious people you have to discover a watch that constructed itself.

Or explain what caused the Big Bang... Causality plays a major role in many fields, scientific and otherwise, but it fails at the point of the Big Bang, as that was an effect without cause... I would be impressed with an explanation of that, but then again, I'm not a conservative and I actually listen to scientific discoveries...

So that means you can go ahead and attribute it to the Christian god?

"I don't know" is the answer I go for.


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 94
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

14 May 2009, 2:56 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:
Sand wrote:
Now, if you want to convince conservative religious people you have to discover a watch that constructed itself.

Or explain what caused the Big Bang... Causality plays a major role in many fields, scientific and otherwise, but it fails at the point of the Big Bang, as that was an effect without cause... I would be impressed with an explanation of that, but then again, I'm not a conservative and I actually listen to scientific discoveries...


There are quite a few things that science has not explained. It reaches an explanation through observation and fitting those observations into the matrix of known facts. Why do you think you can settle the problem by merely naming it God and letting it go at that. It basically means you can be satisfied with merely naming it and not understanding it. Obviously you could not claim to totally understand such a superior being such as the God you claiim exists.



TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

14 May 2009, 3:24 pm

Henriksson wrote:
"I don't know" is the answer I go for.


Me too. I have an intuitive theory around the big-bang that I suspect scientists will one day "discover" and flesh out as fully fledged and mathematically based science, but until then I keep reading the science news. Unfortunately my theory has nothing in it of interest to creationists though and the general public would probably not comprehend it either despite its simplicity - rather like evolution.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Xfractor Card #351

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind

14 May 2009, 5:50 pm

thank god! once the dots are connected it will truely be finished. :jester:
eat it you creationist fags



claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

14 May 2009, 7:29 pm

That was a very interesting article, Tallyman. Thanks for sharing. :D



Khan_Sama
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: New Human Empire

14 May 2009, 11:06 pm

Thanks a lot for the find, it actually confirms my belief that science and religion go hand-in-hand. :)

http://www.uhj.net/bahaiprinciples/science.html

Personally, I believe that quantum physics is the key to unravelling the relationship between science and religion.