This video explains how the origin of life and defies clearly the argument that says "every painting needs a painter therefore God exists". The reason: painting aren't living so can't replicate themselves, living matter, however, can. Life actually began billions of years ago following a series of chemical reactions and a common substance on the planet back then proved a perfect catalyst for this. Over BILLIONS of years, life evolved to form the current human-being, which have only existed for 100,000 years (1/43,200th of the time the Earth has existed.)

A good watch for creationists and evolutionists alike and it dispels common myths about scientists' understanding about the origins of life on Earth.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ozbFerzjkz4

In a way this is so true.. thats why i use to say that we have god.. and god is us itself.. we started all this.. its the way the world works.. people do stuff like setup religion , god .... things like that.. i don't know.. its all a conspiracy.. i mean cmon.. im not saying i dont believe in god for all those people that believe in it.. all im saying is that we are our own gods.. i mean we're the one making the world the way it is.. we're the one that discovers new things everyday.. us human!!! We came to this earth somehow yonks ago.. and no one will ever find out how.. all the stuff people say is just a conspiracy

This post has been edited by keego: Mar 23 2008, 01:46 PM

I watched that youTube clip and nothing in it new except it is video instead of writen or electronic pages.

That can't prove anything. It can't prove claim to something happened 7 billion years ago by making video or film. If something can't be approved exprimently or mathematically, then it is theory and even not scientific theory.

see the scientific theory requirment at http://www.sedrak.ws/Scientific_Theory.htm

Do anyone can apply this theory to produce one tiny cell?

Moreover the DNA shows more than before the need to a creator-designer who put all the information in the DNA to instruct the various cells to do its functions.

Do you know that the information in the DNA can fill a sheet from here to planet Marc?


This post has been edited by kasm: Mar 24 2008, 05:11 AM

That makes it a hypothesis, which according to my old science lessons, is "an idea backed up by lots of really clever scientific thinking":), which makes it respectable because of its scientific backing. This hypothesis cannot be tested because we don't have the knowledge let alone the power to replicate a Big Bang or the creation of life. Let's put it this way, more thought has gone into creating our theories on the world's creation that went into inventing supernatural gods. We all know unicorns don't exist so what makes God's existence any more valid?



Has anyone used the theory behind how lightning is formed to create a bolt of lightning? No. Has anyone witnessed the decomposition of plastics? No. Has anyone created a cell? No. Does that make any of these theories wrong? No.



We just don't know enough about DNA in order to explain logically how the information was put there. I'm sure someone better qualified than me could comment on how DNA works though.



And? That doesn't prove the existence of a deity.

I think the scientific quest to prove evolution can also be explained philosophically (I know... I'm trying to act as a philosopher even though I don't have such a degree...) I think scientists are followers of the human quest for knowledge. This quest has led them to believe (notice I do not say "erroneously believe".) that a complex problem such as life cannot have such a simple answer (i.e. a deity.) Scientists are people who challenge a norm and then find ways to prove it. For example, back in the 1600's, it was common knowledge that the Sun revolved around the Earth. It was up to scientists to disprove this.

Back in the 1800's, it was also common knowledge that the Earth and everything in it was created by someone. Now scientists are trying to challenge this theory and disprove it. To them it is nothing more than a great challenge that they feel compelled to take. While creationists simply flick their hands and say, "No, there's no need to do that; God did it all," scientists are actually trying to prove them wrong.

Of course, some scientists are trying to prove the creationists right, but it's the creationists themselves, not the creation scientists, who are ignorant.

- I know what the hijacker of science teach and claim in their books and school books.

- I am scientist but believer in God[I am not alone]. I studied all the relativity theories and beyond plus the thermodynamics laws by complicated mathematical formulas.

- I accept ideas and hypothis but I don't considered it true until pass the conditions of that.

- I wish you are finished your study because I don't want to confuse you. If you are still studying, you can tell them what they taught to you but in the same time keep your skeptics in your mind.

QUOTE(electriic ink @ Mar 24 2008, 03:26 AM)

This hypothesis cannot be tested because we don't have the knowledge let alone the power to replicate a Big Bang or the creation of life. Let's put it this way, more thought has gone into creating our theories on the world's creation that went into inventing supernatural gods. We all know unicorns don't exist so what makes God's existence any more valid?

If something can't be tested then the theory is historical theory and belief. It is the same as what religion saying except the later can be followed by tracing to our ancestors history 6000 yeras ago but not 7 billions years. By the way claiming something happened 7 billions years ago is baseless. Why 7 bilions not 6 or 9 billions? Who determines that?

QUOTE(electriic ink @ Mar 24 2008, 03:26 AM)

Has anyone used the theory behind how lightning is formed to create a bolt of lightning? No. Has anyone witnessed the decomposition of plastics? No. Has anyone created a cell? No. Does that make any of these theories wrong? No.

In this case there is simple question [please don't answer it again by another question]
Why nobody can create a one cell using this theory?

QUOTE(electriic ink @ Mar 24 2008, 03:26 AM)

We just don't know enough about DNA in order to explain logically how the information was put there. I'm sure someone better qualified than me could comment on how DNA works though.
And? That doesn't prove the existence of a deity.

If you don't know how the information in DNA are put there, then don't deny automatic that may be a designer may be put there . Until that the claimer of the theory have not to claim that there are not painter to the painting as they put in there videos. From where you are sure that there is one can explain that. You could search the internet. I know there is none.

The DNA discovery make big problem to the evolution theory.

My dad is the same as you but the one problem I have with Christian scientists (not to be confused with Scientologists) is that until science can prove something, you take the God-did-it approach. Science WILL be able to explain problems of today, such as the creation of DNA as you described, in the future. Just think of what we've taught ourselves over these past 300 years and, with that in mind, what we will know in the next 300 years.



Because the cellular life took a billion years to form, and even that cell was so basic, it's nothing like the cells we have today. Someone could create life but it would take so long and cost so much money it's not worth doing. Doing it would also be very controversial; excuse my stereotypes, but you would get a lot of Evangelical Christians claiming that doing so would controversial and more evidence that scientists keep "playing God".



It's not the same as religion. Religion is purely faith-based and carries no evidence, not even scientific theory to back it up. There's just as much evidence that God created everything as Martians did. We can trace our ancestors back 6,000 years but we can trace dinosaurs back even further. Below is how they determined the age of the universe to be 13.7 billion years old +/- 0.2 billion years:



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Time...of_the_Big_Bang

And the Earth's age was calculated using radiometric dating.



There may be no-one yet, no.