Mensan Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 If you think it evolution exist.. please explain the flagellar motor. I assume you are talking about the theory of irreducible complexity. If that is the case, then if you take away any part of the bacterial flagellum, then what you are left with has no function. However, if you take away 40 specific parts, you are left with the Type-III secretory system, which is responsible for (among other things) bubonic plague, etc. This is not a flagellum, and is a relatively new discovery. Not only that, but almost every other protien in the bacterial flagellum is strongly homologous to protiens that have other functions in the cell. I thought you were a medical doctor? Don't you study biology? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 I thought you were a medical doctor? Don't you study biology? I wasn't gunna say it. But seriously, Rick, I know you're smart enough to grasp these concepts, you know why we still have moneys and how the theory accounts for that. Therefore I can only assume that your arguments are for the mere sake of making noise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Just think how much of the above peoples time I just killed..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 I assume you are talking about the theory of irreducible complexity. If that is the case, then if you take away any part of the bacterial flagellum, then what you are left with has no function. However, if you take away 40 specific parts, you are left with the Type-III secretory system, which is responsible for (among other things) bubonic plague, etc. This is not a flagellum, and is a relatively new discovery. Not only that, but almost every other protien in the bacterial flagellum is strongly homologous to protiens that have other functions in the cell. I thought you were a medical doctor? Don't you study biology? You are smart..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImUrOBGYN Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Good points Benz and Mensan. I think I could add to both, but I think I'll wait to see where this thread is going. The bacterial flagellum convo has been brought up previously in another conversation (not on a forum, just among myself and two others.) It is better than the banana and peanut butter sandwich defense, but still does not prove the existence of a god. Dammit, I meant it. It's sucking me in. I'm getting out of this thread. I do love these conversations, though. I like to see what people think; the general consensus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bookres.fcgi/mboc4/ch15f67.gif Ok... this is simple. The E.coli need to have the flagellum. Otherwise they would not be able to function. Take away one part of the flagellum, the cannot move therefore they are ineffective. If we got E.coli through evolution, then did we get the flagellum that would have no purpose before the E.coli., or did we have E.coli without a flagellum. If we had E.coli without a flagellum how did it survive long enough to develop the flagellum. Evolution is a theroy, plain and simple. It cannot be proven and more than creation can. For me evolution does not make sense. The odds of all of this around you happening from a "Big Bang" is so remote it is inconceivable. Maybe we have a math person of the board that could figure out how long it would take you to shuffle a deck of cards and get them in suit and numerical order. Getting DNA in order for the simplest creature is extraordinarily more complex than a deck of cards. Just think what the odds are that a bunch of non-living "stuff" organizes itself into a DNA strand. I am hoping that some day all the dead Ford pintos in the world will evolve into mustangs..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Good points Benz and Mensan. I think I could add to both, but I think I'll wait to see where this thread is going. The bacterial flagellum convo has been brought up previously in another conversation (not on a forum, just among myself and two others.) It is better than the banana and peanut butter sandwich defense, but still does not prove the existence of a god. Dammit, I meant it. It's sucking me in. I'm getting out of this thread. I do love these conversations, though. I like to see what people think; the general consensus. maybe if you wait long enough your MKIII will evolve into a MKIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 The universe as we know it, is about 4 TRILLION years old... that first couple of hunderd million years was all about luck your basically asking questions to things that people have just accepted as the way they are. Why does an atom have an electron cloud? It just does. Do you ask how the stove works when trying to learn that its hot and can burn you? Hell no. You just know that you shouldnt touch it because its hot, you dont care how it GOT hot, just that it is. Trying to solve the history of the universe is like taking "X = 1", and expanding it to the most complicatred equation you can... youve got the end answers, and have to work backwards through discovery and break through. Takes thousands of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Maybe we have a math person of the board that could figure out how long it would take you to shuffle a deck of cards and get them in suit and numerical order. Getting DNA in order for the simplest creature is extraordinarily more complex than a deck of cards. Just think what the odds are that a bunch of non-living "stuff" organizes itself into a DNA strand. I heard Fallwell make the same assumption; "It would be like me taking apart my watch, all into its individual peices, then tossing those peices into the air, and having them land, all back together, into a watch". This is a worthless analogy. The ods improve as time goes on. Nothing just "assembled" itself into a DNA strand, you're still stuck in the creationism mindset of "Bam, it's done". I don;t think the majority of people in the world can conceave just how dreadfully long 1.5 billion years is. Here's an example; In 1400, a European mans average height was 4feet'ish. 600 years (1000 generations) later, its 6 feet'ish. So, by the math, in a million years, humans could potentially be over three thousand feet tall. That's just a million years. We have 1.5 billion years of tiny baby steps to get a 200nm nanobacteria to grow in complexity into 100' blue whales. That is a long long time to build animals. DNA is just a string of amino acids. Amino acids have been created in laboratories in simulated "early earth" conditions. Life happens, deal with it. It has been theorized that, given the quickness with which primitive life showed up after the earth coold and liquid water apeared, that primitive life may be a common biproduct of liquid water in various conditions. The rarity comes in having a planet that can sustain complex life for a couple billion years without being pummeld into oblivion in the cosmic shooting gallery. Thanks Jupiter for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 maybe if you wait long enough your MKIII will evolve into a MKIV If it were alive, this would be possible. Unfortunately, it's static. There would be a chance that some oil eating bacteria could form inside of it, though. Maybe some day, a billion years dow the road, they would grow into intellegent life forms, and then discover teh superiority of the 2JZGTE, and order overnight parts from Japan so that it might dominate all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Here's an example; In 1400, a European mans average height was 4feet'ish. 600 years (1000 generations) later, its 6 feet'ish. So, by the math, in a million years, humans could potentially be over three thousand feet tall. That's just a million years. That is purely different nutrition that has resulted in that effect DNA is just a string of amino acids. Amino acids have been created in laboratories in simulated "early earth" conditions. Life happens, deal with it. No one knows what early earth conditions were... It has been theorized that, given the quickness with which primitive life showed up after the earth coold and liquid water apeared, that primitive life may be a common biproduct of liquid water in various conditions. The rarity comes in having a planet that can sustain complex life for a couple billion years without being pummeld into oblivion in the cosmic shooting gallery. Thanks Jupiter for that. Key word = theorized Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Here's some evolution that you can tackle, Rick, it's right up your alley: Round'bout 3500 years ago, there was group of Nomads and part-time mercenaries known as "the outsiders". They worshiped the sun, sacrificed animals and, some beleive, even people to their god. Fast forward to the present, Many of them now beleive that a guy that got nailed to some boards is god. Animal and human sacrifices are not only gone, but strictly forbidden and punishable by death. Sun worshiping, they believe, is bogus and the act of crazy Pegans. They've spread themselves all over the world, and htey like to think they run the joint. Why such a big change over a short period of time? Everything get's its start some where primitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 That is purely different nutrition that has resulted in that effect Explain to me how a reaction to a diet isn't evolution? We see animals all over the place that have different physical charactaristics based on what they eat. If we zap an infant from 1400 forward in time and feed him what we eat, he will not grow to be 6' tall. No one knows what early earth conditions were... We've got a very very good idea. But, without a time machine, you are right. Also without a time machine, the Bible is just a book stories. According to the bible, there was no earth back then. How can you put "scientific" levels of stock in a document that got Genisis and the workings of the natural world so increadibly wrong? Key word = theorized And God is not? As said before, a theory based on oveservations has more credibility then one based on assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Explain to me how a reaction to a diet isn't evolution? We see animals all over the place that have different physical charactaristics based on what they eat. If we zap an infant from 1400 forward in time and feed him what we eat, he will not grow to be 6' tall. You are assuming that the norm of the person would be 4' tall. I am saying that they were not growing to their potential due to lack of nutrition. If you track nutrition thorugh history you will notice that our greatest time of growth was in the last century. Have you ever tried to drive a Model A Ford? I am 6'1" and I can barley fit into the car. My knees rub the dash. Our food industry has changed dramatically in the past 100 years. Genetically altering food, hormones ect. have changed our bodies. We've got a good idea. But, without a time machine, you are right. Also without a time machine, the Bible is just a book stories. The Bible was written over a period of 1800 years by 40+ authors. The authors never met. Somehow they came up with a book that has never been found to have a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 The Bible was written over a period of 1800 years by 40+ authors. The authors never met. Somehow they came up with a book that has never been found to have a mistake. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! BWHAHAHAHAHA!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!1!!1 Are you kidding? If you mean that "no one has ever invented a time machine and gone back to observe a mistake", then yeah. lol Genesis, wrong, totally, utterly. We have recorded history that dates back further then the Bible says the earth is old. (that was a tough sentence, I hope it came out right) The sky is not an ocean, we've been there. The universe does not revolve around Earth, we've observed it. Evolution does happen, we've observed it withing our recorded history. The Autors couldn;t even get their own translations right. Then you have the King James version, a deliberately mistranslated version. It was not written over 1800 years, no one is still adding books to it. Furthermore, here's how a story moves from person to person, evolution again: "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled in the shallows. He waded out there and helped them out. He's a hell of a guy" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked out there and helped them out. He's a hell of a guy" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had tangled. He walked out there and untangled their nets, just like that. He's an incredible man" -"Walked? like on the water?" -"Yeah, "walked" is how I heard it" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked on water out to the boat, and instantly untangled the nets. He's a miracle worker" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked on water out to the boat, and instantly untangled the nets. Not only that, but I heard the nets were full of fish when he was done! He's a livign god." You can also see how a basket of fish and bread feeding a few doezen people can become only a few fish feeding a thousand...AND making them full. "Fish story" syndrome applies to everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! BWHAHAHAHAHA!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!1!!1 Are you kidding? If you mean that "no one has ever invented a time machine and gone back to observe a mistake", then yeah. lol Genesis, wrong, totally, utterly. We have recorded history that dates back further then the Bible says the earth is old. (that was a tough sentence, I hope it came out right) The Autors couldn;t even get their own translations right. Then you have the King James version, a deliberately mistranslated version. It was not written over 1800 years, no one is still adding books to it. Furthermore, here's how a story moves from person to person, evolution again: "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled in the shallows. He waded out there and helped them out. He's a hell of a guy" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked out there and helped them out. He's a hell of a guy" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had tangled. He walked out there and untangled their nets, just like that. He's an incredible man" -"Walked? like on the water?" -"Yeah, "walked" is how I heard it" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked on water out to the boat, and instantly untangled the nets. He's a miracle worker" "Jesus was walking down the beach, saw some fishermen whos nets had drifted and tangled. He walked on water out to the boat, and instantly untangled the nets. Not only that, but I heard the nets were full of fish when he was done! He's a livign god." You can also see how a basket of fish and bread feeding a few doezen people can become only a few fish feeding a thousand...AND making them full. "Fish story" syndrome applies to everything. The bible says "in the begining"... That means the begining.... Genesis 1 covers alot... Can you give me some examples of how the KJV is flawed? I want to hear this..... Bible doctrine, hermeneutics, lexicology are some of my specialties. BTW... No one is adding books for a couple of reasons. First of all the finished work of Christ is done. Secondly Revelations had already been written that wraps up the end times. Therefore no other books are required Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Can you give me some examples of how the KJV is flawed? I want to hear this..... Bible doctrine, hermeneutics, lexicology are some of my specialties. Easy. It is a TRANSLATION. Biblical Historians use the original texts to study, not some stuck up white guy's version. True story KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Also, since you are "right", you must already know this: http://www.bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Also, since you are "right", you must already know this: http://www.bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm KillJoy The newer versions have came into existence mostly in the past one hundred years. The RSV was a publication that distorted the virgin birth of Christ. Due to the this RSV was printed in a Catholic version to rectify the backlash they received . The original funder of the translation were given exclusive rights for ten years to publish it. Each of the newer version tend to align themselves more and more with the New world translation (The JW's Bibile) Many times the newer version will come about due to a group of peoples doctrinal differences. The group developes an idea the is biblically not supported, so they write a new version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Can you give me some examples of how the KJV is flawed? I want to hear this..... Bible doctrine, hermeneutics, lexicology are some of my specialties. And Latin is one of mine. It's funny, the only people who don't think the KJV is flawed are the ones who have it on their shelves. Killjoy posted a great link, have at that for a bit. The Bible is not an historical document, it is a political one. That is why so much was left out when it was first written. It was designed to sway men and keep christendom in line. No killing, unless it's in the name of god. I.E. The crusades No faggery, we need you impregnating women with lil christians No birth control (see no faggery) No jerking off (see no faggery) King Jimmy thought he could best keep the masses by giving them a version in English. This gave him a bit of sway over contents. It's full of simple mistranslations that can distort the meaning of some passages. It has been pointed out that some of these may have been deliberate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAOLE Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 And Latin is one of mine. The Bible is not an historical document, it is a political one. That is why so much was left out when it was first written. It was designed to sway men and keep christendom in line. No killing, unless it's in the name of god. I.E. The crusades No faggery, we need you impregnating women with lil christians No birth control (see no faggery) No jerking off (see no faggery) King Jimmy thought he could best keep the masses by giving them a version in English. This gave him a bit of sway over contents. It's full of simple mistranslations that can distort the meaning of some passages. It has been pointed out that some of these may have been deliberate. The bible does not condone killing for the spread of Christianity. This shows your lack of knowledge. Can you give me an example of a verse that was miss translated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 The bible does not condone killing for the spread of Christianity. This shows your lack of knowledge. Exactly, the bible did not, but the widespread beleif at the time is that it did because of who interpreted it for everyone. At the time of the crusades, it was easy to convince the world that killing muslims was gods will, they couldn't read. The example shows how willing and able those who controled the information were to manipulate and misrepresent it. To think that this didn't go on during the writing of the bible is just naive. Re-mistranslations. My books aint here, and I dont have time to dive all the way into that. Do research, it aint hard. Off the top of my head, since it's kind of an important one: The Mother of Christ according to the New Testament. While it is known that the bible never mentions her being a virgin (mistranslation from the hebrew, the word is "young" and differs by a letter) this fact is often disregarded by Christianity as a whole. The scripture says almah, the word for virgin is betulah. The words written in Hebrew are very similar. It could even be argured that this wasn't a deliberate mistranslation, because all of the works were hand written, and a young monk in dim light may have mistaken ancient handwriting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87GT Posted March 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 I like how we got onto the subject of the bible. I have been raised since I was born into either a catholic church and later into a non-denominational church. Catholics I have talked to say you have to go to church once a week or you go to hell. Also in mass Catholics don't read out of the bible that much. Also worship was very "...boring and mundane" Non-Denominational says you don't have to go to a "church". 2 or more people gathered together praying to God is a church. Also in non-denominational church I went to they constantly read something out of the bible then had a lecture about it. Repeat, repeat etc... Also they love worship. Have a band in church, dance up and down the isles, sing real loud, etc. This could be because of 2 different interpretations of the bible? I feel the bible is a bunch of stories that were wrote to explain good intentions. Think of everything in the bible. They are mostly all stories with good morals in them. Don't kill people, don't judge people different then you, respect others like you would want them to respect you. There are contradictions but I guess this is possible if more then one person is writing a book. Because of this I don't follow the bible verbatim. There are some things I feel are not correct. But overall it is a wonderful book to live your life by IMO. Someone please explain to me why one bible verse in Genesis saying that God gave us and approved all the seed bearing fruits for our use, ( I searched for the next verse on bible.com but could not find it. Someone link me) but later in the bible it says to follow Human law as it is God's law? Is that 2nd part in the bible? If so then is it correct to say that Weed is ok in God's eyes or should we say that Weed is the devil because our government said it was? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 I feel the bible is a bunch of stories that were wrote to explain good intentions. Think of everything in the bible. They are mostly all stories with good morals in them. Don't kill people, don't judge people different then you, respect others like you would want them to respect you. There are contradictions but I guess this is possible if more then one person is writing a book. Because of this I don't follow the bible verbatim. There are some things I feel are not correct. But overall it is a wonderful book to live your life by IMO. OMG teh agree'zor! I've made this point before, though I word it as: It's a book of stories with points, not fact. Every stories value comes from its point, not it's factual content. The point of writing about Jesus and the nets isn't that "OMFG TEH JEEZUS KICKS IT ON WATER HE IS SO BADASS!!", the point is that he went out of his way to help people when it benifitted him in no way. In that respect, it is a great book. But it seems these days that people quote it for hate more than aything else. Afterall, in the bible it says "god hates fags" some where....right? Remember the part in the Bible where it said interracial marriage is a sin?...no?...Are you sure? It must have been in there, because it used to be a law here in the US, and some christian schools still forbid interracial dating. but later in the bible it says to follow Human law as it is God's law? I wonder if the person who penned that happened to be a dude in a position of power, perhaps a law maker of some kind? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinner Posted March 30, 2007 Report Share Posted March 30, 2007 Here's an example; In 1400, a European mans average height was 4feet'ish. 600 years (1000 generations) later, its 6 feet'ish. So, by the math, in a million years, humans could potentially be over three thousand feet tall. Eric the average white of a man today is only 5ft 8 inches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.