What is abiogenesis?

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Would you please tell me how you can bring a dead cell to life?jointed

The very wording of that question shows that you do not understand the point of discussion in this thread. "Bringing a dead cell to life" is not at all what we're talking about. :roll:

lol, isn't that abiogenesis? nonliving materials put themselves together and became alive? :roll:

No, "bringing a dead cell to life" as you so badly worded it, is called resurrection. And we all know that cannot happen.

Oh wait... :roll:

Yes, abiogenesis is bringing a dead cell to life, or a cell becoming alive without any source of life.

A cell can't "come to life"...this once against proves that you don't know what you're talking about. The instant you have a cell, you have life.

So a single-celled organism cannot possibly die??

Of course it can...but the same organism can't come back to life again.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]Because you don't see nonliving things becoming alive and "the earth's condition before was different" is a lame excuseSolidSnake35

doesn't matter how long it took. Still, we don't see nonliving things becoming alive from some STEADY process that started millions of years ago.

I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock)

Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Would you please tell me how you can bring a dead cell to life?Revinh

The very wording of that question shows that you do not understand the point of discussion in this thread. "Bringing a dead cell to life" is not at all what we're talking about. :roll:

lol, isn't that abiogenesis? nonliving materials put themselves together and became alive? :roll:

No, "bringing a dead cell to life" as you so badly worded it, is called resurrection. And we all know that cannot happen.

Oh wait... :roll:

Yes, abiogenesis is bringing a dead cell to life, or a cell becoming alive without any source of life.

A cell can't "come to life"...this once against proves that you don't know what you're talking about. The instant you have a cell, you have life.

So a single-celled organism cannot possibly die??

Of course it can...but the same organism can't come back to life again.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

No, a cell dies when its membrane is destroy. If a new cell were to form, it would be nothing more than that...a new cell.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to lifeRevinh

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I don't know about that part, but it did say he formed man out of dust. And no, the details for those aren't important compared to much of what it contains.SolidSnake35

It has a set of historical events, a source of practical wisdom and advice, God's qualities and purpose for mankind and prophecies. It's not a science textbook.

I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.Revinh

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Would you please tell me how you can bring a dead cell to life?jointed

The very wording of that question shows that you do not understand the point of discussion in this thread. "Bringing a dead cell to life" is not at all what we're talking about. :roll:

lol, isn't that abiogenesis? nonliving materials put themselves together and became alive? :roll:

No, "bringing a dead cell to life" as you so badly worded it, is called resurrection. And we all know that cannot happen.

Oh wait... :roll:

Yes, abiogenesis is bringing a dead cell to life, or a cell becoming alive without any source of life.

A cell can't "come to life"...this once against proves that you don't know what you're talking about. The instant you have a cell, you have life.

So a single-celled organism cannot possibly die??

Of course it can...but the same organism can't come back to life again.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

No, a cell dies when its membrane is destroy. If a new cell were to form, it would be nothing more than that...a new cell.

A cell that died should somehow reform and come back to life..

Living matter from non living matter, typically within a specific environment when the conditions are just right.

It is entirely possible, and a valid theory.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to lifeSolidSnake35

We were talking about single-celled organisms..

Revinh

Actually, it is accepted now that there was no oxygen in the atmosphere of the primordial Earth. Once again, creationists don't have a grasp on a lot of little important aspects of science.

One hypothesis I learnt in Earth Science is that the Earth originally had no oxygen. The proto cells formed in an environment free of oxygen which meant they didn't die. If you listened to the video by VenomfangX, clearly he has not studied a lot of science and doesn't know what he's talking about.

Oxygen was produced through differentiation of the atmosphere and also through organisms that convert carbon dioxide into oxygen. These types of organisms still exist today in our oceans. After millions/billions of years, there would have been enough oxygen for current forms of life to respirate (evolution allowing for this).

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I don't know about that part, but it did say he formed man out of dust. And no, the details for those aren't important compared to much of what it contains.Revinh

It has a set of historical events, a source of practical wisdom and advice, God's qualities and purpose for mankind and prophecies. It's not a science textbook.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]Because you don't see nonliving things becoming alive and "the earth's condition before was different" is a lame excuseRevinh

doesn't matter how long it took. we don't see nonliving things becoming alive from some process that started millions of years ago.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

123625

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

VIVA LA EVOLUCION!

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Would you please tell me how you can bring a dead cell to life?Revinh

The very wording of that question shows that you do not understand the point of discussion in this thread. "Bringing a dead cell to life" is not at all what we're talking about. :roll:

lol, isn't that abiogenesis? nonliving materials put themselves together and became alive? :roll:

No, "bringing a dead cell to life" as you so badly worded it, is called resurrection. And we all know that cannot happen.

Oh wait... :roll:

Yes, abiogenesis is bringing a dead cell to life, or a cell becoming alive without any source of life.

A cell can't "come to life"...this once against proves that you don't know what you're talking about. The instant you have a cell, you have life.

So a single-celled organism cannot possibly die??

Of course it can...but the same organism can't come back to life again.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

No, a cell dies when its membrane is destroy. If a new cell were to form, it would be nothing more than that...a new cell.

A cell that died should somehow reform and come back to life..

No?

See, what you're doing now is desperately trying to find errors in the theory, without succes I might add.

Do me a favour, use the same critical thinking on your christian beliefs....

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to lifeRevinh

We were talking about single-celled organisms..

its still an ad hominem

VIVA LA EVOLUCION!

notconspiracy

Still... I don't care.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.SolidSnake35

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to lifeSolidSnake35

We were talking about single-celled organisms..

My point is that we weren't talking about those other processes.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I don't know about that part, but it did say he formed man out of dust. And no, the details for those aren't important compared to much of what it contains.SolidSnake35

It has a set of historical events, a source of practical wisdom and advice, God's qualities and purpose for mankind and prophecies. It's not a science textbook.

Evidence for what?

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Would you please tell me how you can bring a dead cell to life?jointed

The very wording of that question shows that you do not understand the point of discussion in this thread. "Bringing a dead cell to life" is not at all what we're talking about. :roll:

lol, isn't that abiogenesis? nonliving materials put themselves together and became alive? :roll:

No, "bringing a dead cell to life" as you so badly worded it, is called resurrection. And we all know that cannot happen.

Oh wait... :roll:

Yes, abiogenesis is bringing a dead cell to life, or a cell becoming alive without any source of life.

A cell can't "come to life"...this once against proves that you don't know what you're talking about. The instant you have a cell, you have life.

So a single-celled organism cannot possibly die??

Of course it can...but the same organism can't come back to life again.

LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

No, a cell dies when its membrane is destroy. If a new cell were to form, it would be nothing more than that...a new cell.

A cell that died should somehow reform and come back to life..

No?

See, what you're doing now is desperately trying to find errors in the theory, without succes I might add.

Do me a favour, use the same critical thinking on your christian beliefs....

You fail.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.Revinh

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave life. (I meant body when I said soul.)

You fail.

Revinh

Oh the irony :lol:

Enlighten me...how?

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]Because you don't see nonliving things becoming alive and "the earth's condition before was different" is a lame excusenotconspiracy

doesn't matter how long it took. we don't see nonliving things becoming alive from some process that started millions of years ago.

but it doesn't mean they'll always be formed right in front of a predator.

Evidence for what?Revinh

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

123625

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]LOL that doesn't make any sense!! if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to lifeRevinh

We were talking about single-celled organisms..

My point is that we weren't talking about those other processes.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.SolidSnake35

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave life. (I meant body when I said soul.)

It's not just because we don't see but it's far-fetched.

And I'm not biased. I'm all for science, just not science-fiction (abiogenesis, macroevolution)

[QUOTE="Revinh"]Evidence for what?SolidSnake35

No, if you've been reading my posts, I've given sound reason to believe and how it makes sense. And I didn't just believe the Bible, but through studying it.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.Revinh

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

What's more plausible? Using observation, evidence, and experimentation, or going with an assumption that directly contradicts all the evidence.

In all cases of science we go with the natural explanation because if there is a natural explanation that fits all the evidence, it makes more sence to go with that than a supernatural explanation with no evidence that relies on unseen and unteachable beings.

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

yoshi-lnex

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

yoshi-lnex

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

I could really care less about whatever other people think of me. And there is no observation of evolution, we have never seen another animal give birth and that animal is different. Well we have but only varients within the same kind. It doesnt cahnge the animal's kind. just because you precieve me to be unintellegent does that make it so? Wheres your proof? You have none.

No Evolution is not fact don't tell me otherwise. Its theory and speculation with little to show for it. Please don't argue with me saying its fact when even science doesnt classify it with fact, nor try and use another form of science to justify evolution.

It's not just because we don't see but it's far-fetchedRevinh

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]Evidence for what?Revinh

No, if you've been reading my posts, I've given sound reason to believe and how it makes sense. And I didn't just believe the Bible, but through studying it.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.yoshi-lnex

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

What's more plausible? Using observation, evidence, and experimentation, or going with an assumption that directly contradicts all the evidence.

In all cases of science we go with the natural explanation because if there is a natural explanation that fits all the evidence, it makes more sence to go with that than a supernatural explanation with no evidence that relies on unseen and unteachable beings.

Observation? You have observed nonliving things come to life?? WHERE?!?

[QUOTE="Revinh"]It's not just because we don't see but it's far-fetchedSolidSnake35

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]Because you don't see nonliving things becoming alive and "the earth's condition before was different" is a lame excuseRevinh

doesn't matter how long it took. we don't see nonliving things becoming alive from some process that started millions of years ago.

but it doesn't mean they'll always be formed right in front of a predator.

It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.Revinh

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.Revinh

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

What's more plausible? Using observation, evidence, and experimentation, or going with an assumption that directly contradicts all the evidence.

In all cases of science we go with the natural explanation because if there is a natural explanation that fits all the evidence, it makes more sence to go with that than a supernatural explanation with no evidence that relies on unseen and unteachable beings.

Observation? You have observed nonliving things come to life?? WHERE?!?

humans have created the components of life as I've mentioned numerous times, and you'd see if you'd just watch the video.

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.Revinh

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

What's more plausible? Using observation, evidence, and experimentation, or going with an assumption that directly contradicts all the evidence.

In all cases of science we go with the natural explanation because if there is a natural explanation that fits all the evidence, it makes more sence to go with that than a supernatural explanation with no evidence that relies on unseen and unteachable beings.

Observation? You have observed nonliving things come to life?? WHERE?!?

seriously revinh, you should take your objections to evolution/abiogenesis here: christianforums.com/f70

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

123625

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

I could really care less about whatever other people think of me. And there is no observation of evolution, we have never seen another animal give birth and that animal is different. Well we have but only varients within the same kind. It doesnt cahnge the animal's kind. just because you precieve me to be unintellegent does that make it so? Wheres your proof? You have none.

No Evolution is not fact don't tell me otherwise. Its theory and speculation with little to show for it. Please don't argue with me saying its fact when even science doesnt classify it with fact, nor try and use another form of science to justify evolution.

Reading your posts is like taking a ride in the time-travellingmobile back to the 18th century...

[QUOTE="Revinh"]It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.SolidSnake35

Despite the mounds of evidence for evolution, Revinh continues to deny it's existance, yet by contrast, with no evidence he believes in a deity.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.SolidSnake35

Of course. There's overwhelming evidence of his works everywhere. The earth is full of his production.

[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]I wanna see a nonliving thing come to life (not necessarily a rock) Also, stop failing to understand my post. You wouldn't be able to moderate me if I'm highlighting.yoshi-lnex

If you want to see something non living come to life, I want to see God create another human from dust.

Well, you wouldn't see that, he already did that before.

However, we don't see life arising from nonliving things, only life from life, so it's more plausible that God formed souls and gave them life. (I meant like 'body' when I said soul.)

What's more plausible? Using observation, evidence, and experimentation, or going with an assumption that directly contradicts all the evidence.

In all cases of science we go with the natural explanation because if there is a natural explanation that fits all the evidence, it makes more sence to go with that than a supernatural explanation with no evidence that relies on unseen and unteachable beings.

Observation? You have observed nonliving things come to life?? WHERE?!?

humans have created the components of life as I've mentioned numerous times, and you'd see if you'd just watch the video.

components of, not life

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

jointed

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

I could really care less about whatever other people think of me. And there is no observation of evolution, we have never seen another animal give birth and that animal is different. Well we have but only varients within the same kind. It doesnt cahnge the animal's kind. just because you precieve me to be unintellegent does that make it so? Wheres your proof? You have none.

No Evolution is not fact don't tell me otherwise. Its theory and speculation with little to show for it. Please don't argue with me saying its fact when even science doesnt classify it with fact, nor try and use another form of science to justify evolution.

Reading your posts is like taking a ride in the time-travellingmobile back to the 18th century...

Petty insults show nothing on your behalf.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.Revinh

Of course. There's overwhelming evidence of his works everywhere. The earth is full of his production.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

You fail.

jointed

Oh the irony :lol:

Enlighten me...how?

if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

A cell that died should somehow reform and come back to life..

Therefore, you fail. :)

[QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

You fail.

Revinh

Oh the irony :lol:

Enlighten me...how?

if they could've formed and became alive, then surely it could somehow also come back to life

A cell that died should somehow reform and come back to life..

Therefore, you fail. :)

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

123625

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

I could really care less about whatever other people think of me. And there is no observation of evolution, we have never seen another animal give birth and that animal is different. Well we have but only varients within the same kind. It doesnt cahnge the animal's kind. just because you precieve me to be unintellegent does that make it so? Wheres your proof? You have none.

No Evolution is not fact don't tell me otherwise. Its theory and speculation with little to show for it. Please don't argue with me saying its fact when even science doesnt classify it with fact, nor try and use another form of science to justify evolution.

Reading your posts is like taking a ride in the time-travellingmobile back to the 18th century...

Petty insults show nothing on your behalf.

[QUOTE="Revinh"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Revinh"]It IS pure story telling. Its evidences are overwhelmingly pathetic.SolidSnake35

Of course. There's overwhelming evidence of his works everywhere. The earth is full of his production.

I don't have to have seen it. Purposeful design is evident in them and that requires a Designer.

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]

123625, your signiture is NOTHING more than an ad hominem attack on charles darwin and people who accept darwinian evolution

im just curious, how old do you believe the earth and the universe to be?

123625

Hey ive seen plenty sigs against god too and my beleifs. I'll leave it there cause i want to. How old do i think the earth and universe to be? I don't know and i will never know untill i die i suppose. So i don't know basically, just like we don't know alot of things.

Cause im allowed to do it... Dude its just a sig expressing somewhat of my views on what science has became. Im entitled to my view, (Not my quote by the way). Please don't start anything you have the right to post whatever you want in your sig and i have mine.

I could really care less about whatever other people think of me. And there is no observation of evolution, we have never seen another animal give birth and that animal is different. Well we have but only varients within the same kind. It doesnt cahnge the animal's kind. just because you precieve me to be unintellegent does that make it so? Wheres your proof? You have none.

No Evolution is not fact don't tell me otherwise. Its theory and speculation with little to show for it. Please don't argue with me saying its fact when even science doesnt classify it with fact, nor try and use another form of science to justify evolution.

Reading your posts is like taking a ride in the time-travellingmobile back to the 18th century...

Petty insults show nothing on your behalf.

Seriously, you're using the exact same arguments christian nut jobs used 150 years ago.

It happens over time, what part of that don't you get?