[Lunar Shadow]

Quote: (Originally Posted by SecretWeapon)

Yeah, I know ABiogenesis is complicated, and I'm not too stupid to
understand that.



Show me where I said that ABiogenesis is this simple. I don't recall ever
saying that it is simple at all. After following that link and reading that
article, I left alot of these points not underlined, but if you could explain
away the underlined ones (without being rude) I'd be much obliged.
Ignore the ones not underlined. Number one will most likely make you
flip out, like you usually do. Ignore it. Yes, please forgive me, I got it
from a "fundie" website, but if you do not explain I will be forced to believe
that you cannot.

1 - Spontaneous generation has been scientifically disproved

2 - Instant success would have to be necessary for the life form to survive

3 - Thousands of essential body parts and thousands more of essential chemical compounds would have to instantly form themselves

4 - Both male and female forms would need to make themselves and be near each other in space and time - OR asexual bacteria
would have to change into sexual bacteria, how could this happen?

5 - Law of mass action would immediately destroy chemical compounds

6 - Water is never enough to produce life chemicals

7 - There is no lab equipment out in nature

8 - Condensation problem: Water must be carefully removed for fats, sugars, and nucleic acids to derive out of protein

9 - Precipitation problem: Enzymes would immediately be destroyed

10 - Most life chemicals not found in watery environment

11 - Lightning bolts only damage and kill and could not be the energy source

12 - Oxygen problem: Life could not originate where there is oxygen

13 - Life could not survive without continual oxygen

14 - Oxidized iron is found in rocks existing where life is said to have originated

15 - Life can not originate without water. But there can be no water without oxygen

16 - A reducing atmosphere (no oxygen) would produce life-killing peroxides

17 - Ultraviolet light in reducing atmosphere would immediately kill life

18 - Without oxygen, there would be no protective ozone layer

19 - Proteins would immediately hydrolyze and destroy themselves

20 - There would not be enough chemicals available to form even the simplest protein

21 - Nitrogen is in most biochemicals, but there is not enough concentrated nitrogen in nature to form life

22 - There is not enough available phosporus in nature either

23 - Scientists have no idea how to make fatty acids or how they could make themselves

24 - The atmosphere throughout the world would have to instantly change from no oxygen to its present oxygen-rich content

25 - Extremely complicated chemical combinations not found in nonliving material exist in living tissue

26 - Residue problem: Since such extremely rich chemical mixtures are found in living things, we should find residues of them in nature, but they do not exist

27 - Accidental formations of amino acids would produce equal amounts of left- and right-handed forms which exist in animal life

28 - Dissolution problem: Even if correct chemicals gather together, the next instant they would spontaneously disintegrate by forming with other chemicals

29 - Immediate, complete duplication and reproduction of DNA, Protein enzymes, fats, cells, etc. would be needed for survival

30 - There is not the remotest possibility life could originate by itself. There is not enough time and space in all the universe and in all eternity to product our present myriad of living species on earth


I'm also interested in how the Cambrian Explosion is explained. Apearantly
a "boom" of complicated creatures came out of nowhere, with no fossil
evidence of more simple creatures before them.

Also, if the "fundie" websites have a good point I'm going to use it. If you
dismiss a fact just because of who said it then I say you are ignorant.
I could say that my hair is brown and you could choose to disbelieve it
just because my name is Ryan, but that doesn't make much sense, does it?
Of course not. Just because a website that is "fundie" says something
doesn't mean that you should ignore just because it came
from a "fundie" site, even if it's true.

rather than quote mining and taking up Steves bandwidth I am just gonna post a link for a rebuttle it is on you to read it and if you don't thats not my problem..... if you have any questions then we'll talk. Go HERE


and to answer the Macroevolution question you can go HERE