C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Dave1050 » Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:12 pm

If so the evidence that life comes from lifeless chemicals is all around you!!! If we were to pick you apart atom by atom what we would have is a of lifeless chemicals - all from the periodic table. There are no other known chemicals, and there are no life forms that we know of that contain anything beyond those chemical elements. Therefore life comes from lifeless chemicals.

And black is white, night is day, good is bad and I'm my own grandfather! :D
Dave1050
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:39 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby cathy » Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:31 pm

And black is white, night is day, good is bad and I'm my own grandfather!

Intriguing but utterly meaningless statement Dave! And one that bears absolutely no relation to my point.

We are all made of the chemical elements found on the periodic table. Please explain what your statement adds to that or what it even means. Otherwise I can't really respond to it.

And as you wish to engage in scientific debate please answer my questions or provide your definitions.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Brian Jordan » Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:49 pm

Dave1050 wrote:And black is white, night is day, good is bad and I'm my own grandfather! :D
Ah, you're learning, sort of. You are actually one quarter of your own grandfather. Although. of course, since most bits of your grandparents' genomes will have been the same, you might as well have got much of the remaining three quarters from the same grandparent. I'm not sure how much will have come uniquely from your grandmothers and your other grandfather. but not much. After all, you're much more like them than you are to a chimp, so less than 2%. So well done! You're more than 98% your grandfather!
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4209
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:08 am

Dave1050 wrote:
If so the evidence that life comes from lifeless chemicals is all around you!!! If we were to pick you apart atom by atom what we would have is a of lifeless chemicals - all from the periodic table. There are no other known chemicals, and there are no life forms that we know of that contain anything beyond those chemical elements. Therefore life comes from lifeless chemicals.

And black is white, night is day, good is bad and I'm my own grandfather! :D


What do you think a virus is, then? Life or a replicating chemical?
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby cathy » Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:22 pm

Ah, you're learning, sort of. You are actually one quarter of your own grandfather. Although. of course, since most bits of your grandparents' genomes will have been the same, you might as well have got much of the remaining three quarters from the same grandparent. I'm not sure how much will have come uniquely from your grandmothers and your other grandfather. but not much. After all, you're much more like them than you are to a chimp, so less than 2%. So well done! You're more than 98% your grandfather!

Ah! Apropos of nothing whilst we wait for Dave to stop firing arrows of whimsy and answer some questions I remember a massive row about whether my kids could use their grandparents to call themselves 50% Irish.

One of those bring your cultural heritage to school days when child one was tiny - so I sent her off with a stuffed leprechaun and overboiled potato to represent my half of the gene pool. But her dad argued I couldn't not having been born in Ireland and never having lived there. So I pulled the two out of four grandparents = 50% card! Was I right?

Plus I could claim Irish cultural heritage. Whilst friends did ballet and brownies I did traditionally celtic things like Irish dancing and nun baiting.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Apr 26, 2013 2:10 pm

I've just come across an excellent account of abiogenesis research that is suitable for both doubters and the just plain interested. It's two or three years old now, so may need a little updating in the light of more recent research but it's well worth reading. It's written by Calilasseia, a member of this forum, btw.
Incidentally, it was provoked by some of the worst creationist lying drivel that I've seen for some time.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=39030&view=unread#unread see post #27
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4209
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Atheoscanadensis » Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:49 am

But without any ultimate standard by which to judge 'goodness' your goodness and anyone else's is just a matter of opinion so why should I listen to your definition?


I'd just like to point out here that any morality derived from God is completely arbitrary and therefore much less useful than a secular definition of morality.

Of course eveyone can make up their own mind and I would encourage them to do so, BUT many views on religion are conflicting and they can't ALL be right or equally valid can they? So you have to decide which one is correct.


So how do you decide which one is right? What evidence do you have that your flavour of religion is correct the other flavours are wrong? If it's just your decision then so be it, but don't pretend that your religion somehow outcompetes the others in therms of authority.
Atheoscanadensis
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:00 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Roger Stanyard » Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:51 am

Atheoscanadensis wrote:
But without any ultimate standard by which to judge 'goodness' your goodness and anyone else's is just a matter of opinion so why should I listen to your definition?


I'd just like to point out here that any morality derived from God is completely arbitrary and therefore much less useful than a secular definition of morality.

Of course eveyone can make up their own mind and I would encourage them to do so, BUT many views on religion are conflicting and they can't ALL be right or equally valid can they? So you have to decide which one is correct.


So how do you decide which one is right? What evidence do you have that your flavour of religion is correct the other flavours are wrong? If it's just your decision then so be it, but don't pretend that your religion somehow outcompetes the others in therms of authority.


The fundamentalists have a circular argument here - that everyone, irrespective of their opinions, was made in the image of God and therefore their personal opinions on religion don't matter. As they were made in the image of God, the fundamentalists must be right. As I say about ideologues, the ideology is never wrong, just people that let it down.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby Brian Jordan » Thu May 09, 2013 6:17 pm

Talking of stardust, here's a thrilling story for the creationists to chew on. It even has sediment in it!
First Biological Evidence of a Supernova: Remains of Exploding Star Discovered in Bacteria

These iron-loving bacteria are called magnetotatic bacteria and live within the sediments of Earth's oceans, close to the water-sediment interface. There, they make hundreds of tiny crystals of magnetite within their cells. In order to obtain iron to create these crystals, the bacteria actually utilize atmospheric dust that enters the ocean. This unique property is what provided the evidence for a supernova<snip>
The fact that these bacteria sop up iron means that when a supernova hurled its material toward Earth, the bacteria also absorbed Fe-60. The researchers actually examined a Pacific Ocean sediment core from the Ocean Drilling Program, dating between 1.7 and 3.3 million years ago. More specifically, they took sediment samples corresponding to intervals of about 100,000 years and then treated them chemically in order to extract any Fe-60 that they might contain.

In the end, the researchers discovered these isotopes occurring about 2.2 million years ago. This actually matches the expected time from a previous study.
http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/6725/20130508/first-biological-evidence-supernova-remains-exploding-star-discovered-bacteria.htm
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4209
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu May 09, 2013 8:56 pm

Brian Jordan wrote:Talking of stardust, here's a thrilling story for the creationists to chew on. It even has sediment in it!
First Biological Evidence of a Supernova: Remains of Exploding Star Discovered in Bacteria

These iron-loving bacteria are called magnetotatic bacteria and live within the sediments of Earth's oceans, close to the water-sediment interface. There, they make hundreds of tiny crystals of magnetite within their cells. In order to obtain iron to create these crystals, the bacteria actually utilize atmospheric dust that enters the ocean. This unique property is what provided the evidence for a supernova<snip>
The fact that these bacteria sop up iron means that when a supernova hurled its material toward Earth, the bacteria also absorbed Fe-60. The researchers actually examined a Pacific Ocean sediment core from the Ocean Drilling Program, dating between 1.7 and 3.3 million years ago. More specifically, they took sediment samples corresponding to intervals of about 100,000 years and then treated them chemically in order to extract any Fe-60 that they might contain.

In the end, the researchers discovered these isotopes occurring about 2.2 million years ago. This actually matches the expected time from a previous study.
http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/6725/20130508/first-biological-evidence-supernova-remains-exploding-star-discovered-bacteria.htm


2.2 million years ago? Where they there?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8578
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: C.M.I. have a go at "first life" !

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu May 09, 2013 8:58 pm

But I will now re-read my post here at 4.53 pm on 8.2.13:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2970&p=44003&hilit=supernova#p44003
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8578
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Previous

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron