| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 26 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 15:08:04 |
| Calls: | 491 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 1,077 |
| Messages: | 68,794 |
| Posted today: | 2 |
I see you have trouble with the concept of "if."
I don't. I addressed your
On 7/4/25 9:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
I see you have trouble with the concept of "if."
Lol! Doubling down! Big SCORE on the Troll-O-Meter for
you!
If Don Pardo was here he'd be announcing your 10 extra
doses of your meds you just won...
There's no "If." Abiogenesis has never been observed.
Abiogenesis has never been achieved in a laboratory.
Nobody is "Studying" abiogenesis any more than they are
"Studying" unicorns.
No "If."
It ain't happening.
On 7/4/25 9:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
I don't. I addressed your
Typical narcissist... thinks he's an expert, cherry picks
what to disputes, does so badly... can't admit to any
error...
Dawn Flood wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle
Some explain to Dawn Davenport that Wiki isn't a legitimate
cite.
All Wiki is useful for is to establish that you didn't make
something up. The fact that it's in Wiki in no way excludes
the probability that it's made up, it just establishes that
you aren't the one who made it up.
If you can read, checked the articles CITED BY Wiki. These
is a chance you will find a legitimate cite supporting a
claim.
"Attila" wrote in message
news:42ea6kl14e750g85r9o0oo2p9ckn0pa1ak@4ax.com...
"Andrew" wrote:
"Dawn Flood" wrote:
Andrew wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
name a single miracle; name a single scientific paper in the last >>>>>> 40 years that appeals to "God" as being an explanation for anything. >>>>DNA
DNA is a molecule that contains the specific instructions for the
synthesis of ~~~ every living thing~~~ The prime origin of these
instructions that are in digital code format could of necessity -
only- be from a source of Intelligence.
Our most awesome Creator.....
GOD
Okay, you didn't answer my question, and that is fine.
There has been abundant scientific evidence in the
last 40 years, as well an since the very beginning of
time telling us that there has been a super Intelligence
involved in our existence.
Such as what? Direct evidence, not indirect evidence.
I just posted direct evidence above..
If you can't see it, that tells us you don't want to see it.
But then that would tell us that you were a fool.
"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that
a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with
chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth
speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts
seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond
question." ~ Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist
Opinion without supporting fact.
Rather the conclusion of a scientist after examining the evidence.
"From my earliest training as a scientist I was very strongly
brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind
of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed. I am
quite uncomfortable in this situation, the state of mind I now find
myself in. But there is no logical way out of it. I now find myself
driven to this position by logic. There is no other way in which we
can understand the precise ordering of the chemicals of life except to
invoke the creations on a cosmic scale. . . We were hoping as
scientists that there would be a way round our conclusion, but there
isn't." ~ Sir Frederick Hoyle and Chandra Wickramsinghe,
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:13:40 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/4/25 9:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
I see you have trouble with the concept of "if."
Lol! Doubling down! Big SCORE on the Troll-O-Meter for
you!
If Don Pardo was here he'd be announcing your 10 extra
doses of your meds you just won...
Was he your boyfriend?
There's no "If." Abiogenesis has never been observed.
Neither has your brain.
Abiogenesis has never been achieved in a laboratory.
No one expects it to have been. First you need a self-replicating
entity that can evolve over millions of years from just replication
to being alive.
Nobody is "Studying" abiogenesis any more than they are
"Studying" unicorns.
No "If."
It ain't happening.
If pigs could fly, we'd need better umbrellas. Likewise, if
abiogenesis was not being studied, you wouldn't have something like
this:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/05/250528132057.htm
"Chemists at UCL and the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology have demonstrated how RNA (ribonucleic acid) might have replicated itself
on early Earth -- a key process in the origin of life."
So you see how the word "if" works?
Check & mate!
On 7/4/2025 5:41 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:13:40 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/4/25 9:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
I see you have trouble with the concept of "if."
Lol! Doubling down! Big SCORE on the Troll-O-Meter for
you!
If Don Pardo was here he'd be announcing your 10 extra
doses of your meds you just won...
Was he your boyfriend?
There's no "If." Abiogenesis has never been observed.
Neither has your brain.
Abiogenesis has never been achieved in a laboratory.
No one expects it to have been. First you need a self-replicating
entity that can evolve over millions of years from just replication
to being alive.
Nobody is "Studying" abiogenesis any more than they are
"Studying" unicorns.
No "If."
It ain't happening.
If pigs could fly, we'd need better umbrellas. Likewise, if
abiogenesis was not being studied, you wouldn't have something like
this:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/05/250528132057.htm
"Chemists at UCL and the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology have
demonstrated how RNA (ribonucleic acid) might have replicated itself
on early Earth -- a key process in the origin of life."
So you see how the word "if" works?
Check & mate!
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:13:40 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Abiogenesis has never been achieved in a laboratory.
No one expects it to have been.
First you need a self-replicating
entity that can evolve over millions of years from just replication
to being alive.
If pigs could fly, we'd need better umbrellas.
"Chemists at UCL and the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology have demonstrated how RNA (ribonucleic acid) might have replicated itself
on early Earth -- a key process in the origin of life."
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:18:04 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Typical narcissist... thinks he's an expert, cherry picks
what to disputes, does so badly... can't admit to any
error...
You narcissistic troll.
On 7/2/2025 10:02 PM, JTEM wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle
Some explain to Dawn Davenport that Wiki isn't a legitimate
cite.
All Wiki is useful for is to establish that you didn't make
something up. The fact that it's in Wiki in no way excludes
the probability that it's made up, it just establishes that
you aren't the one who made it up.
If you can read, checked the articles CITED BY Wiki. These
is a chance you will find a legitimate cite supporting a
claim.
Then what religion was Professor Hoyle?
On 7/2/2025 3:50 PM, Andrew wrote:
"From my earliest training as a scientist I was very strongly
brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind
of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed. I am
quite uncomfortable in this situation, the state of mind I now find
myself in. But there is no logical way out of it. I now find myself
driven to this position by logic. There is no other way in which we
can understand the precise ordering of the chemicals of life except to
invoke the creations on a cosmic scale. . . We were hoping as
scientists that there would be a way round our conclusion, but there
isn't." ~ Sir Frederick Hoyle and Chandra Wickramsinghe,
Was Professor Hoyle an atheist?
Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:13:40 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Abiogenesis has never been achieved in a laboratory.
No one expects it to have been.
Really? No one? You took a poll?
You're just doubling down, making shit up and hoping to covers
your stupidity (it doesn't).
First you need a self-replicating
entity that can evolve over millions of years from just replication
to being alive.
Says who? How was this determined? Where did you get this "Millions
of years" from? What? You made it all up? You're in free fall
fantasy, unable to distinguish your disorder(s) from reality?
If pigs could fly, we'd need better umbrellas.
Great. Still no abiogenesis being studied.
"Chemists at UCL and the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology have
demonstrated how RNA (ribonucleic acid) might have replicated itself
on early Earth -- a key process in the origin of life."
What does "might have" mean in your native tongue?
And how was this determined to be a process?
Wow. You believe in bullshit and you're too stupid to even know it!
Wait a minute! You're one of those fake online "atheists," aren't
you? I can tell.
On 7/4/25 6:42 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:18:04 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Typical narcissist... thinks he's an expert, cherry picks
what to disputes, does so badly... can't admit to any
error...
You narcissistic troll.
Wow you're as original as you are bright... being neither.
So abiogenesis is a belief,
I bet
On 7/4/25 9:06 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
I bet
Lol! You're a sniveling little coward and intellectual
gnat! You read my reply FIRST and then stated the above.
"Idiocy suddenly becomes brilliance if you quote it!"
You're a narcissist so you need to see yourself quoted.--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
I replied directly to you. Idiot.
Why these emotional spasms? Why not just accept reality?
As a fake atheist, you don't even have any "Evidence" for
the existence of atheists, as you won't accept personal
testimony!
Theists do have evidence. You may not find it compelling,
or your massive collection of mental disorders may block
you from thinking about it (only lashing out) but they
do have "Evidence."
The secret here is in the definition of "Evidence," nimrod.
They have science invoking God, although using a different
name -- "Observer" or even "Programmer" -- to avoid triggering
the idiots, and of course they have miracles and medical
miracles in particular but you have nothing.
Literally nothing!
YOU can't even support the existence of atheists, if you
forget to be a hypocrite and actually abide by your own
rules....
You're the furthest thing from "Science."
You're irrational.
Welcome to my killfile, you freak.