| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Dr Tam" |
| Date: |
04 Apr 2005 10:02:18 PM |
| Object: |
Creation |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4408187.stm
A European team claims to have obtained the first direct image of a planet
beyond our own Solar System.
The "extrasolar planet" is said to orbit a star called GQ Lup - thought to
be like a young version of our Sun.
Similar claims have been made in the past, but sceptical scientists believe
the pictures merely show objects that share the same view in the sky.
The GQ Lup object is far more certain claims Ralph Neuhaeuser's team in the
journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.
GQ Lup and its companion are located in a star-forming region about 400
light-years away.
Dr Tam
.
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation |
11 Apr 2005 03:18:09 PM |
|
|
In article <e8pk51d4qsne41cpqtk28e5nvq3jiu1mn0@4ax.com>,
Pastor Dave <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:24:37 +0100, while wishing I
would go away, Féachadóir <Féach@d.óir> said:
Scríobh Turlough <TurloughX@comcast.net>:
westprog wrote:
The reason to suppose that life arose from non-life is that we can clearly
see from the fossil record that at one point there was life, and a little
bit earlier there wasn't - or at least, none that has left any trace. Go
back a bit further and we have a planet that couldn't support any form of
life that we can imagine.
That's an incredible leap of faith. Fossil records show micro evolution.
Fossil records show evidence of evolution, full stop. The only
distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is scale.
Bull. There is no record of macroevolution. You know
it and I know it...
WE know no such thing. See, for example,
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
Enough
microchanges, and you end up with macrochanges. All it takes is time.
The evolutionists magic wand. If you can't prove
something, just wave the "time" wand.
Well, there's been plenty of time. Now where's the
fossil evidence for macroevolution?
At http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation |
10 Apr 2005 11:35:12 PM |
|
|
Turlough <TurloughX@comcast.net> wrote in
news:KqqdnWJzIJA9c8TfRVn-gA@comcast.com:
westprog wrote:
The reason to suppose that life arose from non-life is that we can
clearly see from the fossil record that at one point there was life,
and a little bit earlier there wasn't - or at least, none that has
left any trace. Go back a bit further and we have a planet that
couldn't support any form of life that we can imagine.
That's an incredible leap of faith. Fossil records show micro
evolution.
What prevents microevolution from accumulating into macro?
That's fine. Until science shows life springing from non life, the
only other reasonable explanation would be the intervention of a
designer.
Would you settle for a virus?
From the point of view of the sceptic, there are plenty of physical
processes that could allow life to be spontaneously created from
non-living matter. Living things convert air, water and sunlight into
living matter all the time, so we know it's possible. The boundaries
are not as sharp as one might suppose. At the level of a virus, it
isn't obvious whether we are dealing with a living thing.
Then what is at stake here, is the definition of a living thing. I
view a virus as a living organism, even if it is suspended or dormant.
Ah, you would settle for a virus? then go here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Post Colonial Boy" |
|
| Title: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 04:15:40 PM |
|
|
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY
It is the stuff of science fiction and bioethical debates: The
creation of artificial life. Up until now, it's largely been just
that.
But an important technical bridge towards the creation of such life
was crossed Thursday when genomics pioneer Craig Venter announced that
his research group created an artificial virus based on a real one in
just two weeks' time.
When researchers created a synthetic genome (genetic map) of the virus
and implanted it into a cell, the virus became "biologically active,"
meaning it went to work reproducing itself.
Venter cautioned that the creation of artificial human or animal life
is a long way off because the synthetic bacteriophage — the virus that
was created — is a much simpler life form. Bacteriophages are viruses
that infect bacteria.
The project was funded in part by the Department of Energy, which
hopes to create microbes that would capture carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere, produce hydrogen or clean the environment.
But the questions ethicists have raised about such work are numerous:
Should we be playing God? Does the potential for good that new life
forms may have outweigh the harm they could do?
Arthur Caplan, who heads the University of Pennsylvania's Center for
Bioethics, says yes. This technology "is impressive. It's powerful and
it should be treated with humility and caution," Caplan says, "But we
should do it."
A genome is made up of DNA "letters," or base pairs, that combine to
"spell" an individual's chromosomes. The human genome project was
completed in April.
This summer, researchers at Venter's Institute for Biological Energy
Alternatives bought commercially available strands of DNA and, using a
new technology, coaxed them together to form a duplicate of the genome
of a bacteriophage called phi X.
"It's a very important technical advance," says Gerald Rubin, a
molecular geneticist at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. "You can
envision the day when one could sit down at a computer, design a
genome and then build it. We're still inventing the tools to make that
happen, and this is an important one."
Venter notes the synthetic bacteriophage has 5,000 base pairs in its
genome. The human genome has 3 billion, so similar work in human form
probably won't happen in this decade, he says.
To date, the largest genome that was synthesized was the
7,500-base-pair polio virus. But that was only semi-functional and
took three years to complete.
The researchers chose to put the new technology into the public domain
for all scientists to use. It will appear in the next few weeks on the
Web site of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The technology raises safety issues, says David Magnus of Stanford's
Center for Biomedical Ethics. Even putting it in the public domain is
"a double-edged sword," he says. That presumes that allowing everyone
access will keep the good guys ahead of the bad guys. "It's a gamble.
.... It's a bet that everyone has a stake in," he says.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 05:23:53 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> wrote:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY
It is the stuff of science fiction and bioethical debates: The
creation of artificial life. Up until now, it's largely been just
that.
But an important technical bridge towards the creation of such life
was crossed Thursday when genomics pioneer Craig Venter announced that
his research group created an artificial virus based on a real one in
just two weeks' time.
When researchers created a synthetic genome (genetic map) of the virus
and implanted it into a cell, the virus became "biologically active,"
meaning it went to work reproducing itself.
Venter cautioned that the creation of artificial human or animal life
is a long way off because the synthetic bacteriophage — the virus that
was created — is a much simpler life form. Bacteriophages are viruses
that infect bacteria.
The project was funded in part by the Department of Energy, which
hopes to create microbes that would capture carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere, produce hydrogen or clean the environment.
But the questions ethicists have raised about such work are numerous:
Should we be playing God? Does the potential for good that new life
forms may have outweigh the harm they could do?
Arthur Caplan, who heads the University of Pennsylvania's Center for
Bioethics, says yes. This technology "is impressive. It's powerful and
it should be treated with humility and caution," Caplan says, "But we
should do it."
A genome is made up of DNA "letters," or base pairs, that combine to
"spell" an individual's chromosomes. The human genome project was
completed in April.
This summer, researchers at Venter's Institute for Biological Energy
Alternatives bought commercially available strands of DNA and, using a
new technology, coaxed them together to form a duplicate of the genome
of a bacteriophage called phi X.
"It's a very important technical advance," says Gerald Rubin, a
molecular geneticist at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. "You can
envision the day when one could sit down at a computer, design a
genome and then build it. We're still inventing the tools to make that
happen, and this is an important one."
Venter notes the synthetic bacteriophage has 5,000 base pairs in its
genome. The human genome has 3 billion, so similar work in human form
probably won't happen in this decade, he says.
To date, the largest genome that was synthesized was the
7,500-base-pair polio virus. But that was only semi-functional and
took three years to complete.
The researchers chose to put the new technology into the public domain
for all scientists to use. It will appear in the next few weeks on the
Web site of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The technology raises safety issues, says David Magnus of Stanford's
Center for Biomedical Ethics. Even putting it in the public domain is
"a double-edged sword," he says. That presumes that allowing everyone
access will keep the good guys ahead of the bad guys. "It's a gamble.
... It's a bet that everyone has a stake in," he says.
PCB,
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
A musician can make a song by aranging words that already exist, or
sounds that already exist, or notes that already exist; but he can not
"create" a song from "nothing."
A writer can make a story using words that exist or form new words
from sounds and letters that already exist; but he can not "create"
something from nothing.
An artist can make a painting by mixing colors on canvas, a a skulptor
can make a statue from rock a vase from clay; but he can not "create"
something from nothing.
The words "created," "made," and "formed," from the Hebrew "bara,"
"asah," and "yatsah" are used with exact precision in Genesis and each
means exactly what it means. God created the heavens and the earth,
something from nothing. God made the firmament, the great lights and
stars, and animals from materials that existed, and Lord God formed
men and animals from the ground.
Men use words haphazardly, especially the word "create" which they
have bastardized from its original meaning of to cause to exist which
has not existed before - something from nothing to mixing somethings
that already exist together to produce something else.
Non-commercial website where everything is free.
http://www.biblebob.net
BB
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
13 Apr 2005 04:59:41 AM |
|
|
"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:9qho51pqkte6ua3smv7cvv3o829ok8824d@4ax.com...
....
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
....
Exactly. Life was not created on Earth a billion or so years ago. Certain
chemicals rearranged themselves in a way that gave rise to life. Nothing was
there that wasn't there before. A wonderful example of God's providence.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 09:57:53 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:59:41 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:9qho51pqkte6ua3smv7cvv3o829ok8824d@4ax.com...
...
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
...
Exactly. Life was not created on Earth a billion or so years ago. Certain
chemicals rearranged themselves in a way that gave rise to life. Nothing was
there that wasn't there before. A wonderful example of God's providence.
What's a g-o-d?
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 09:59:56 AM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:3jlv51p4guk34ld0ac8oaut0ucm69vak70@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:59:41 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:9qho51pqkte6ua3smv7cvv3o829ok8824d@4ax.com...
...
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
...
Exactly. Life was not created on Earth a billion or so years ago. Certain
chemicals rearranged themselves in a way that gave rise to life. Nothing
was
there that wasn't there before. A wonderful example of God's providence.
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary fiction
created to frighten small children. Certainly not an old man with a beard
who is incapable of the big idea.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 10:03:29 AM |
|
|
"westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8FQ7e.51591$Z14.40197@news.indigo.ie...
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:3jlv51p4guk34ld0ac8oaut0ucm69vak70@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:59:41 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:9qho51pqkte6ua3smv7cvv3o829ok8824d@4ax.com...
...
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
...
Exactly. Life was not created on Earth a billion or so years ago.
Certain
chemicals rearranged themselves in a way that gave rise to life.
Nothing
was
there that wasn't there before. A wonderful example of God's
providence.
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 10:05:07 AM |
|
|
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in message
news:3ca3dcF6n7p3bU1@individual.net...
....
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 07:03:29 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 16:05:07 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in message
news:3ca3dcF6n7p3bU1@individual.net...
...
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
No faith involved.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
16 Apr 2005 05:59:11 AM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ohl061pk5n70415hqa95cn7urmglfkecus@4ax.com...
....
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary
fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
No faith involved.
Certainty in this matter requires faith. There's no proof either way. The
only people claiming to know for sure do so from their inner needs, not
external evidence.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
17 Apr 2005 09:50:38 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:59:11 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ohl061pk5n70415hqa95cn7urmglfkecus@4ax.com...
...
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary
fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
No faith involved.
Certainty in this matter requires faith.
(laughing at you)
There's no proof either way. The
only people claiming to know for sure do so from their inner needs, not
external evidence.
Really?
Then, I'm sure you'll be able to provide;
-a coherant and concise definition for the g-o-d letter string
-objective supporting evidence for its existance
-objective supporting evidence the universe was manufactured
-dealing with the broken logic inheirant in the creator concept
-indicating, and providing objective supporting evidence, how
something can be created from nothing, how something can be created
when time didn't exist, as well addressing what motive (lack/need)
something that is perfect® has to do anything. Note: A lack or need
eliminates perfection.
If you cannot address properly these few items above then you will
have supported my point. (this should be interesting to see how he
'dances and wiggles').
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
17 Apr 2005 01:18:33 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:pht461lj25meh430csutgvc79ihbhgm2r3@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:59:11 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ohl061pk5n70415hqa95cn7urmglfkecus@4ax.com...
...
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary
fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
No faith involved.
Certainty in this matter requires faith.
(laughing at you)
That's sounding more and more like Pastor Dave.
There's no proof either way. The
only people claiming to know for sure do so from their inner needs, not
external evidence.
Really?
Then, I'm sure you'll be able to provide;
-a coherant and concise definition for the g-o-d letter string
-objective supporting evidence for its existance
-objective supporting evidence the universe was manufactured
-dealing with the broken logic inheirant in the creator concept
-indicating, and providing objective supporting evidence, how
something can be created from nothing, how something can be created
when time didn't exist, as well addressing what motive (lack/need)
something that is perfect® has to do anything. Note: A lack or need
eliminates perfection.
If you cannot address properly these few items above then you will
have supported my point. (this should be interesting to see how he
'dances and wiggles').
No, I don't have to do any of the above, because I'm indicating that the
matter is in doubt, and you are indicating that it is a matter of certainty.
I'm not claiming anything beyond the fact that we don't know for sure.
That's quite a weak claim. Claiming to know beyond doubt the nature of the
entire universe is a strong claim.
So you need to provide a detailed description of what you are sure doesn't
exist.
- Objective supporting evidence for its non-existence.
- Objective supporting evidence that the universe came into being without
being manufactured
- and so on...
One of the main objections I have with the creationists is the lazy dance
they have with the athiests, both sides smugly sure of themselves. Nobody
wanting to learn anything, just going through the motions. Go back to
alt.atheism if you want that kind of undemanding audience.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
18 Apr 2005 11:36:39 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:18:33 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:pht461lj25meh430csutgvc79ihbhgm2r3@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:59:11 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:ohl061pk5n70415hqa95cn7urmglfkecus@4ax.com...
...
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary
fiction
created to frighten small children.
The latter
I wish I had such faith.
No faith involved.
Certainty in this matter requires faith.
(laughing at you)
That's sounding more and more like Pastor Dave.
Drools the person nattering about a socially acceptable version of
'Santa Claus.'
There's no proof either way. The
only people claiming to know for sure do so from their inner needs, not
external evidence.
Really?
Then, I'm sure you'll be able to provide;
-a coherant and concise definition for the g-o-d letter string
-objective supporting evidence for its existance
-objective supporting evidence the universe was manufactured
-dealing with the broken logic inheirant in the creator concept
-indicating, and providing objective supporting evidence, how
something can be created from nothing, how something can be created
when time didn't exist, as well addressing what motive (lack/need)
something that is perfect® has to do anything. Note: A lack or need
eliminates perfection.
If you cannot address properly these few items above then you will
have supported my point. (this should be interesting to see how he
'dances and wiggles').
No, I don't have to do any of the above, because I'm indicating that the
matter is in doubt, and you are indicating that it is a matter of certainty.
What 'matter,' liar? You idiots assert all sorts of things. I asked
you to provide objective supporting data for those assertions. You
did not and then can't understand why your drooling idiocy is not
accepted.
You indicated a menu of two items as a response to my question. The
first did not apply and the second did. That it gets your panties in
a knot is your personal problem. You generated the menu responses.
Don't blame me for your screwups.
Religion (superstition) is based on the persons inner needs. Such is
demonstrated by the believers individual reactions to questions.
Reactions such as yours, for example.
I'm not claiming anything beyond the fact that we don't know for sure.
That's quite a weak claim. Claiming to know beyond doubt the nature of the
entire universe is a strong claim.
Damn! Christian bearing of false witness is, again, shown to be a
sacrament. Once again a Christian demonstrates their 'precious' Ten
Commandments® are neither commandments nor precious.
So you need to provide a detailed description of what you are sure doesn't
exist.
- Objective supporting evidence for its non-existence.
- Objective supporting evidence that the universe came into being without
being manufactured
- and so on...
***** oh dishonest sack of Christian dog *****.
Utilizing your (cough) Logic®; you borrowed 500,000 UKP from me three
months ago. You had promised to have the funds returned to my bank
account no later than April 7, 2005. As of this writing the borrowed
funds have not been returned. You, sir, are a thief, a liar, a
deceiver, and a scoundrel. You may lack belief the money is owed, but
unless you can show me objective supporting evidence the funds aren't
owed then they are.
One of the main objections I have with the creationists is the lazy dance
they have with the athiests, both sides smugly sure of themselves. Nobody
wanting to learn anything, just going through the motions. Go back to
alt.atheism if you want that kind of undemanding audience.
*****, oh brainless and ignorant twit. I *am* in alt.atheism,
moron. If you've got a complaint then address it to the person who
started the crossposting.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
18 Apr 2005 04:33:57 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:o0n7619bjnhrcbp7eh5m9c771ccr294ce7@4ax.com...
....
That's sounding more and more like Pastor Dave.
Drools ...nattering ...'Santa Claus.'
Yes, I'm afraid so, Stoney. Claiming infallibility you need either a billion
followers, or failing that, a few good arguments. What next - are you going
to say "Liar. Goodbye"?
....
No, I don't have to do any of the above, because I'm indicating that the
matter is in doubt, and you are indicating that it is a matter of
certainty.
What 'matter,' liar?
Bloody hell, he is. It's Pastor Dave's estranged twin.
You idiots assert all sorts of things. I asked
you to provide objective supporting data for those assertions. You
did not and then can't understand why your drooling idiocy is not
accepted.
You indicated a menu of two items as a response to my question. The
first did not apply and the second did. That it gets your panties in
a knot is your personal problem. You generated the menu responses.
Don't blame me for your screwups.
Religion (superstition) is based on the persons inner needs. Such is
demonstrated by the believers individual reactions to questions.
Reactions such as yours, for example.
Yes, beliefs about the nature of the universe are usually based on a
person's inner needs. Thing is, that applies to everyone. Including Mr
Stoney.
I'm not claiming anything beyond the fact that we don't know for sure.
That's quite a weak claim. Claiming to know beyond doubt the nature of
the
entire universe is a strong claim.
Damn! Christian bearing of false witness is, again, shown to be a
sacrament. Once again a Christian demonstrates their 'precious' Ten
Commandments® are neither commandments nor precious.
This is just rambling. What an easy ride the creationists have been giving
you.
So you need to provide a detailed description of what you are sure
doesn't
exist.
- Objective supporting evidence for its non-existence.
- Objective supporting evidence that the universe came into being without
being manufactured
- and so on...
***** oh dishonest sack of Christian dog *****
Utilizing your (cough) Logic®; you borrowed 500,000 UKP from me three
months ago. You had promised to have the funds returned to my bank
account no later than April 7, 2005. As of this writing the borrowed
funds have not been returned. You, sir, are a thief, a liar, a
deceiver, and a scoundrel. You may lack belief the money is owed, but
unless you can show me objective supporting evidence the funds aren't
owed then they are.
One of the main objections I have with the creationists is the lazy dance
they have with the athiests, both sides smugly sure of themselves. Nobody
wanting to learn anything, just going through the motions. Go back to
alt.atheism if you want that kind of undemanding audience.
*****, oh brainless and ignorant twit. I *am* in alt.atheism,
moron. If you've got a complaint then address it to the person who
started the crossposting.
Well, I'm convinced. All my objections have been cogently addressed by the
third "*****".
I think I'll talk to Virgil. He seems comparitively civilised, compared to
the knuckle draggers who've wandered in.
J/
SOTW: "God's Footballer" - Billy Bragg
http://homepage.eircom.net/~albedo1/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
15 Apr 2005 07:02:55 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:59:56 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:3jlv51p4guk34ld0ac8oaut0ucm69vak70@4ax.com...
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:59:41 +0100, "westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:9qho51pqkte6ua3smv7cvv3o829ok8824d@4ax.com...
...
There is no indicattion that anyone "created" anything - no one
produced something from nothing. They may have "made" something from
somethings; but they did not "create" anything.
...
Exactly. Life was not created on Earth a billion or so years ago. Certain
chemicals rearranged themselves in a way that gave rise to life. Nothing
was
there that wasn't there before. A wonderful example of God's providence.
What's a g-o-d?
Either the fundamental cause of all existence, or an unnecessary fiction
created to frighten small children. Certainly not an old man with a beard
who is incapable of the big idea.
Clearly an unnecessary fiction created to frighten small children who
grow up into deranged adults. There is zero objective supporting
evidence for the former and is begged questions, broken logic and it
answers nothing.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 05:28:59 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that? That's why it's called, "ARTIFICIAL".
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditations." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 08:59:03 PM |
|
|
In article <bful519l5o5sd1e3jvit0vdbps11ugdptp@4ax.com>,
Pastor Dave <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life.
Then what, in the alleged mind of IDiot Dave, does constitute life?
It is debatable, and debated, among scientists whether viruses are life,
but there are those who hold that prions are life , too.
So where, if there is a clear boundary, does that boundary lie?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 07:38:36 PM |
|
|
In article <bful519l5o5sd1e3jvit0vdbps11ugdptp@4ax.com>,
Pastor Dave <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life.
What does mean life if reproduction does not?
That's why it's called, "ARTIFICIAL".
Then all life is artificial, at least according to the IDiots, since
according to them no life is created purely by nature.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Post Colonial Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 11:47:37 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:38:36 -0600, Virgil
<ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote:
In article <bful519l5o5sd1e3jvit0vdbps11ugdptp@4ax.com>,
Pastor Dave <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life.
What does mean life if reproduction does not?
That's why it's called, "ARTIFICIAL".
Then all life is artificial, at least according to the IDiots, since
according to them no life is created purely by nature.
<laughter>
And Dave was insulting *my* intelligence before...the irony is
crushing.
PCB
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Post Colonial Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
11 Apr 2005 11:46:45 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life. How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
That's why it's called, "ARTIFICIAL".
Artificial...made eh? By design eh? From bits that aren't living to
start with eh?
PCB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Smaill" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virusthat reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 10:08:03 AM |
|
|
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
PCB
--
Alan Smaill
.
|
|
|
| User: "max.it" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 01:15:08 PM |
|
|
Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
For life.
max.it (the orange cage)
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
PCB
--
Alan Smaill
.
|
|
|
| User: "An Mac Tíre Bán" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 03:15:01 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:15:08 +0000 (UTC), (max.it) wrote:
Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
For life.
max.it (the orange cage)
10 points to Max for stating the obvious! -10 for the dopey question! :-=)
- smiling man with mustache...
Ray
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Everyone, Republican or otherwise has their own
particular part to play. No part is too great or too
small, no one is too old or too young to do something."
Bobby Sands (1954-1981), on hunger strike in 1981
Email: rayh(-remove-)@iol.ie
Website: http://www.eirefirst.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ned Kelly" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virus that reproduces |
13 Apr 2005 12:50:58 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:15:01 GMT, An Mac Tíre Bán <rayh@iol.ie.>
wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:15:08 +0000 (UTC), (max.it) wrote:
Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
For life.
max.it (the orange cage)
10 points to Max for stating the obvious! -10 for the dopey question! :-=)
- smiling man with mustache...
My question is obvious...obviously if life could not reproduce it
would only last its own lifetime...its a "dopey" question in response
to some extremely dopey arguments.
PCB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Smaill" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virusthat reproduces |
13 Apr 2005 09:12:24 AM |
|
|
Ned Kelly <republican@email.com> writes:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:15:01 GMT, An Mac Tíre Bán <rayh@iol.ie.>
wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:15:08 +0000 (UTC), (max.it) wrote:
Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
For life.
max.it (the orange cage)
10 points to Max for stating the obvious! -10 for the dopey question! :-=)
- smiling man with mustache...
My question is obvious...obviously if life could not reproduce it
would only last its own lifetime...its a "dopey" question in response
to some extremely dopey arguments.
How about explaining your own claim:
"Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life."
or is that an extremely dopey argument??
PCB
--
Alan Smaill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Post Colonial Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create a virusthat reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 02:20:59 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:08:03 +0100, Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
We'll get there Alan. Don't you worry.
PCB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Smaill" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create avirusthat reproduces |
12 Apr 2005 03:42:35 PM |
|
|
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:08:03 +0100, Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
We'll get there Alan. Don't you worry.
Care to clarify your own comments, then, you know, just
so all concerned see what you're getting at .... ?
what did you mean when you said:
"Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life." ?
PCB
--
Alan Smaill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ned Kelly" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists create avirusthat reproduces |
13 Apr 2005 12:55:00 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:42:35 +0100, Alan Smaill
<smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:08:03 +0100, Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:59 GMT, Pastor Dave
<news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:15:40 +1200, while Pastor Dave
was preaching from the housetops, Post Colonial Boy
<mimir@iconz.co.nz> spake thusly:
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm
Scientists create a virus that reproduces
Reproduction does not mean life. You claim to have a
degree in science and work in science and yet, don't
know that?
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
We'll get there Alan. Don't you worry.
Care to clarify your own comments, then, you know, just
so all concerned see what you're getting at .... ?
what did you mean when you said:
"Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life." ?
*If* something can reproduce without assistance (apart from the
assistance of the sexual partner in the case of heterosexual
reproduction), then it is alive.
PCB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Smaill" |
|
| Title: Re: For Pastor Dave to peruse and answer: Scientists createavirusthat reproduces |
13 Apr 2005 09:17:33 AM |
|
|
Ned Kelly <republican@email.com> writes:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:42:35 +0100, Alan Smaill
<smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:08:03 +0100, Alan Smaill <smaill@inf.ed.ac.uk>
wrote:
Post Colonial Boy <mimir@iconz.co.nz> writes:
....
Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life.
Crystals are pretty good at reproducing themselves.
von Neumann's book on self-reproducing automata is another place to
look for non-biological reproduction.
How long does life last for if it
cannot reproduce itself?
A bit of the necessary/sufficient distinction is in order here.
We'll get there Alan. Don't you worry.
Care to clarify your own comments, then, you know, just
so all concerned see what you're getting at .... ?
what did you mean when you said:
"Certainly the ability to reproduce is one of the key factors
indicating the presence of life." ?
*If* something can reproduce without assistance (apart from the
assistance of the sexual partner in the case of heterosexual
reproduction), then it is alive.
Thanks for the clarification.
I repeat my comment above:
Crystals can do this --
I am not happy in concluding that they are alive,
but maybe you are.
PCB
--
Alan Smaill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
