Scientists Baffled-New Discoveries-Darwinian Evolution Crumbling-Scientists Abandon Theory

I for one find it funny to talk with religious fanatics! While I type the answers, I can picture in my head all of their "questions" and "gotcha!" moments. All of the same old worn fallacies, all of the same punny arguments taught in bible studies and pulpits. The fun part is try to guess which one they will come up. Finally when they give up(eventually they do, reason will win sometime), they go with the "lalalalalala can't hear, I'm right, god, bible, jesus lalalala". This is the time to teach them the lesson of humbleness. To make them understand our insignificance when compared to the universe, that we are not special and the world is not made for us. The moment we make all the fanatics understand that(really understand it), is the moment we will make a step forward as a species. Is the moment that folclore, superstition and mythology will be a thing of the past and we can finally start to solve our problems with reason, which is one of the pillars of science and completely absent in religion.

Funny how I can't post to this thread anymore............

Problem solved, a character was obviously unsupported

Last Edited by newtome on 01/03/2019 09:32 PM

Abiogenesis is a wonderful theory, it is necessary to explain where we came from, but it is only a theory.

I postulated a theory years ago that we are nothing more than a science experiment of a very advanced race. A race that knows how to create universes and different kinds of life. We are existing in a jar under a kids table in a classroom with our origins being nothing more than a high school science project. Of course because of the scale we can't see to the end of the "universe" so we can't see what is beyond, ie the classroom.

Yes, all the scientific laws still apply, life must come from somewhere. If we were created by a high school kid the high school kid must have still come from somewhere.

But right now abiogenesis is nothing more than a theory. When you can say it has been observed or created in a laboratory let me know. Until then it is a theory.

I am not claiming we are the result of a Creator or a God because I have no direct evidence and to believe that required faith. Abiogenesis is exactly the same. It is a logical explanation but just because it makes sense does not make it so. Until you have proof, until it is validated, you are simply wanting to believe that it is so.

The theory of the Big Bang Theory was put forward by a Belgian Catholic Priest Georges Lemaitre.

The Catholic church pounced on it claiming it supported and proved the Bible claims of "In the beginning".

When Georges told the church to pull their heads in and let the theory stand alone and on its merits the scientific community started taking it seriously. Before that scientists such as Einstein dismissed it because it was likely only postulated to support the Bible.

Yet, today, the layman believes the BBT to be how everything started while the scientific community knows it is an incorrect theory but has nothing better to replace it with, or do they?

So even a scientific theory deemed correct is now shown as not and has been known to be wrong for something like 40 years.

I am a religious nothing
I am seeking an answer that can be shown to be true.

You are mocking all things religious while I am only asking for proof of the things you are offering up as how we are here. If you truly support science I don't know why you wouldn't support the scientific method and accept that a scientific theory or premise is only that until shown or proven to be true.

Seems you have trouble using reason when you can't just yell at the Bible????

You're far, far away from being a truth seeker. You're just another fanatic, babbling the same apologetics falsities, a dunce looking at a mirror crying and drying your tears with tissues weaved with lie thread. Science and the scientific method is the closest to perfection we can get to fathom the universe around us. Whenever you want truth, is the science road you should travel. But all of your words fall flat, claiming to be a truth seeker but drooling mysticism. The simple fact you go "its just a theory", tells so much about you that your punny mind is uncapable of wrapping itself around. Learn, study, enlighten yourself! Escape the cave of superstition and become better. Its so liberating to understand the value of knowledge over fear.

So when it comes down to it you actually have nothing to add but debating skills and insults.

Spent 10 years at University, 3 qualifications, 2 of which are post graduate, and a professional designation. Have no interest in religion but the history of scientific theories such as the Big Bang do interest me.

Offer me something that is real otherwise just say it is the best we have right now and hopefully we will demonstrate it's validity soon.

Didn't someone gestate a mammoth a year or so ago?

I have always found it interesting that the most knowledgeable in a field are also the first to admit how much they don't know.

It is fascinating how the opposite also tends to hold true......

Abiogenesis is the best we have right now, but it's miles ahead of your high school science hypothesis. It's not fair to compare the two. We've proven that organic matter can come from inorganic matter, we've proven that self replicating RNA can assemble naturally, we've proven that RNA can form ribosomes that build nucleotides which are the building blocks of DNA.

The common ancestry model within evolution theory is much better supported than abiogenesis. The ERV evidence is essentially as reliable as the results of a paternity test.

Last Edited by Spur-Man on 01/03/2019 11:30 PM

When you say "proven" what do you mean exactly? Has it been observed, replicated or the scientific world just knows that it must be so? Happy to read papers etc explaining how organic matter comes from inorganic matter?

For evolution you first need life.

Obviously I mean that it has been observed and replicated. The creation of organic matter from inorganic matter was demonstrated nearly 70 years ago during the miller-Urey experiments.

Yes, for evolution you need life. But you don't need to explain how life began in order to explain evolution. If abiogenesis was proven false, it wouldn't refute evolution.

Yes, for evolution you need life. But you don't need to explain how life began in order to explain evolution. If abiogenesis was proven false, it wouldn't refute evolution.

Yes, agreed



Unfortunately the same can be said of the Bible, evolution is not incompatible with the Bible either.

Scientists have also reconciled the 6,000 year issue to the billions of years.

Where life has come from is another matter.........

The creation of organic matter from inorganic matter was demonstrated nearly 70 years ago during the miller-Urey experiments.

Could be argued almost 200 years from other experiments.

Doesn't seem to be any closer to actual life

Creationists are the ones rejecting evolution, plenty of Christians accept it.

Evolution has mountains of evidence. More so than abiogenesis or the big bang. Creationists have nothing but faith in a literal interpretation of Genesis, and they try to project that faith onto scientists.

Yes, where life comes from is another matter, which is why I am trying to keep the conversation focused on evolution. But we know that natural forces exist, we know that matter exists, so abiogenesis requires less assumptions than Creationism.

Last Edited by Spur-Man on 01/04/2019 12:35 AM

200 years? Of course it is closer to actual life. Creating the parts of a cellphone is closer to a cellphone than chunks of minerals. The miller urey experiment shows that the components that comprise life can be naturally produced from inorganic minerals.

Much more progress has been made since miller Urey.

Last Edited by Spur-Man on 01/04/2019 12:41 AM

Honestly, it doesn't feel like you're graduated, judging by the way you talk and the things in mention the way you do.

Its unnecessary to "offer you something that is real". It was already done many posts ago. Science and the scientific method is real.

Exactly! Its completely idiotic claim to know everything, even in your own field of expertise.

Nope, the bible has nothing of scientific. The earth is not 6k years, this was proven by Clair Patterson, in the 50's me thinks. We don't know exactly how life formed, we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle yet, but for sure it was not created by magic.

So once again you jump to conclusions and show your ignorance.

Where did I say the Earth is 6,000 years? Never did.

and finally you admit that we don't know how life formed yet you are so sure about how it wasn't created.

I don't think anyone was proposing magic.

Last Edited by newtome on 01/04/2019 06:25 AM

Are you claiming ALL science is real? Even the science that has been and will be proven to be completely wrong?

Are you really gonna be THIS dishonest?

Yes, ALL science is real. Although we might diverge on what you think science is and what it REALLY is.

What evidence? You have yet to present any evotards.
30 years I waited for your evidence that never came.

[link to www.youngearth.com (secure)]

Evotards are the dumbest most deluded critters on the planet.

Isn't it amusing to see illiterate fanatics argue on topics they don't have a clue? Trying to prove magic to be real, trying to prove their invisible angry dude in the sky is really there. So funny!

So your saying chickens are not Raptors?

I knew that was bs. What a joke.

For sure aliens went around the world resurrecting dinos cause it was fun for them... get real.

Let me find you a paper that explains what you willfully choose to ignore.

Open your mind instead of jumping at every possible Biblical shadow.

Have you tried looking for the evidence? I've presented some in this thread, and I debunked most of the arguments on your Creationist propaganda site

Most scientists accept evolution. Plenty of 'Evotards' are definitely smarter than you are.