The Big Bang (Origins)

by xeno6696 @, Sonoran Desert, Thursday, May 13, 2010, 03:59 (5096 days ago) @ David Turell

That article is just the same old same old whirlwind in a junkyard argument.
> > What Pasteur showed was that life, in the form of grubs or flies, do not emerge by spontaneous generation. He did not show that chiral molecules cannot emerge from series of series of chemical reactions over long time periods and under many changing environmental conditions. Once life was established, using molecules of particular chirality, then of course it continued to reproduce molecules of the same chirality. That is what reproduction means.
> 
> I would just love to see the article in a biologic journal that shows a mechanism whereby chirality can be totally shifted from left to right or back again by any biologic process, when the coding that controls life's processes is so specifically one way. Evolution cannot explain why amino acids in life are left-handed and nucleic acids are all right-handed, 100%, -
I have to interject here, David. This is because evolution explains life AFTER life got here, not origins. Evolution makes no claim whatsoever about origins. You're barking at the wrong tree. (And so is George, if that's what he means.) -or why that need be so through natural selection. Handedness describes fittedness? Great just-so story.
> -You've stated yourself the fact that life is one-handed. While I still don't take this as evidence of creation, since all life either came from -1. the same ancestor -OR-2. the same process (in many different places) -Then clearly, all life preserves the nature of what brought it into existence, whatever it is. -
> Another aspect of evolution by reproduction and natural selection is the human retina is backwards. Is backwards more fit, or terrible design by the designer, as judged by Darwinists? We already know that this design provides the greatest amount of energy for the cells. Now we see that the backward cells actually refine vision!
> 
> http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v104/i15/e158102

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum