The debate "Latest attempt to prove creation to Nemiroff XD" was started by
August 9, 2016, 11:58 am.
9 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Blue_ray posted 1 argument, dalton7532 posted 1 argument, Christian posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
dalton7532, Blue_ray, thereal, Christian, Azzah, human and 3 visitors agree.
PsychDave, monikofos, ProfessorX, carrieunderwood007, slipknot and 5 visitors disagree.
no, the law of conservation states that energy (matter is a form of evergy) cannot be created or destroyed, only changed to another type of energy.
Doesn't the law if thermodynamics disprove matter is eternal?
or matter simply always existed.
where did this person outside of space and time come from?
It is harder to believe someone outside time space and matter created matter than matter created itself?
it truly is beautiful.
life what a complicated thing we don't even fully understand:-)
still very far from life tho. it was a piece of a protein.
it worked in the end according to the article.
so it was debunked?
I actually looked it up after you claimed that it was debunked. that was not a criticism and they didn't come near to making any kind of organism (or even a complete protein)
I heard that they kept it in a container and pushed it to the limit really trying to make life but since it was in a contain area unlike real life it couldn't be proven and it didn't make more than single cell organisms. though this is what I heard only.
I don't remember anything about it being debunked. if I remember correctly they made a dna precursor. they used a concoction of molecules believed to have been abundant at the time + zapping it with electricity, but they were missing one element, time.
I'm not sure how long the experiment ran, but it may have taken millions to billions of years for life to form.
have we made life like this? I only recall one experiment with any sussess and it was a few molecules and was debunked from what I read.
if you get a handful of top line (of the periodic table) elements in a liquid solution with sufficient heat, life is inevitable.
life, at its basic level, is just chemistry. in the presence of energy input (provided in abundance by the geothermal activity of early earth) complexity of any system increase. the result, the complex organic molecules of life.
Your use of the phrase "nearly impossible" robs the rest of the statement of any real weight. Statistically, anything that is only unlikely to happen will happen eventually. With billions of suns, there are many places it could have happened. With billions of years, there are many times it could have happened. If even you concede that it is possible, how can you justify denying it could happen?
Point 1, life cannot be created naturally. It is mathmatically and logically impossible because creating a protein sustainable for sustainable life naturally is nearly impossible and to mention any imperfections would render the protein incompatible for life. This is simple science.
I never denied the possibility of some sort of creation, science does not say there is no creator, they just state what they find regarding how it came to be.
now if your going to try to prove a literal biblical creation, go ahead and make your case.
this pretty much sums up all of your arguments perfectly dalton. you throw out an opinion and are completely unable to back it up. the symbolism is perfect.