DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Sober Thinking
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Sound Christian Doctrine
*****************************************************
#Post#: 703--------------------------------------------------
"I do not deny any scientific evidence. The argument from
consequences that you make has NO effect on the validity of t
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 11, 2022, 2:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-090422150144.png<br
/>Continued
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622153109-13691906.gif<br
/>from EVOLUTION IS a Religion of Greed, Cruelty and Death based
on ATHEISM.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg702/#msg702:
Gary Walker > Sober Thinking
So much wrong with this, I don't know where to start.
Argument from consequence fallacy.
Sober Thinking > Gary Walker
So, WHY do you deny the SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?
Yup, you certainly DO NOT know where to start. Enjoy your
Atheist Belief system PROCRUSTEAN BED.
--- Quote ---
> "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." --
Aldous Huxley
--- End Quote ---
Gary Walker > Sober Thinking
I do not deny any scientific evidence.
The argument from consequences that you make has NO effect on
the validity of the Theory of Evolution.
Sober Thinking > Gary Walker
You said, "I do not deny any scientific evidence.
The argument from consequences that you make
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg702/#msg702<br
/>has NO effect on the validity of the Theory of Evolution."
🤔
Your position is, correct me if I am misinterpreting what you
just wrote, that you are willing to consider scientific evidence
based arguments that question the validity of Theory of
Evolution, but consider Social Darwinism's ethically bankrupt,
society damaging influence a consequence not relevant to said
validity.
I agree that the damage to human society caused by Social
Darwinism is a separate subject from the scientific evidence
based validation, or invalidation, of the Theory of Evolution.
That is why I did not limit my comment to consequences. The
physical constants that precisely determined, before the first
atom came into existence, the force of gravity that would enable
even atoms to form and then to coalesce into molecules (and so
on - no atoms, no stars, no planets, no possibility of life,
etc. you get the idea) I mentioned are irrefutable scientifc
evidence that our Universe was created, not formed from random
undirected processes.
I consider it irrational (i.e denying scientific evidence) to
ignore those physical constants (I'll list several of them here
for you if you wish to check them out, one by one) based on your
view that the Darwin's biological "natural selection" premise of
the Theory of Evolution is "not related" to the origin of the
Universe. WHY? Because both categories address the core issue of
random (no Superbeing Designer- the Universe and all life in it
resulted from random undirected processes) versus non-random (a
Superbeing Designer that created the Universe and Providentially
created all life in it) origins.
For that reason , I didn't get into the biological arguments
invalidating the Theory of Evolution. If you are sincere about
not questioning scientific evidence invalidating the Theory of
Evolution, then you will be interested in reading the following
statements from these eminently credentialed scientists:
PROFESSOR COLIN REEVES, Coventry University
Darwinism was an interesting idea in the 19th century, when
handwaving explanations gave a plausible, if not properly
scientific, framework into which we could fit biological facts.
However, what we have learned since the days of Darwin throws
doubt on natural selection’s ability to create complex
biological systems – and we still have little more than
handwaving as an argument in its favour.
Professor Colin Reeves
Dept of Mathematical Sciences
Coventry University
HTML https://dissentfromdarwin.org/2008/09/22/professor_colin_reeves_coventr/
EDWARD PELTZER, University of California, San Diego (Scripps
Institute)
As a chemist, the most fascinating issue for me revolves around
the origin of life. Before life began, there was no biology,
only chemistry — and chemistry is the same for all time. What
works (or not) today, worked (or not) back in the beginning. So,
our ideas about what happened on Earth prior to the emergence of
life are eminently testable in the lab. And what we have seen
thus far when the reactions are left unguided as they would be
in the natural world is not much. Indeed, the decomposition
reactions and competing reactions out distance the synthetic
reactions by far. It is only when an intelligent agent (such as
a scientist or graduate student) intervenes and “tweaks” the
reactions conditions “just right” do we see any progress at all,
and even then it is still quite limited and very far from where
we need to get.
Thus, it is the very chemistry that speaks of a need for
something more than just time and chance. And whether that be
simply a highly specified set of initial conditions
(fine-tuning) or some form of continual guidance until life
ultimately emerges is still unknown. But what we do know is the
random chemical reactions are both woefully insufficient and are
often working against the pathways needed to succeed. For these
reasons I have serious doubts about whether the current
Darwinian paradigm will ever make additional progress in this
area.
Edward Peltzer
Ph.D. Oceanography, University of California, San Diego (Scripps
Institute)
Associate Editor, Marine Chemistry
HTML https://dissentfromdarwin.org/2008/09/02/edward_peltzer_university_of_c/
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-200422175637.png[/center]
CHRIS WILLIAMS, Ph.D., Biochemistry Ohio State University
As a biochemist and software developer who works in genetic and
metabolic screening, I am continually amazed by the incredible
complexity of life. For example, each of us has a vast ‘computer
program’ of six billion DNA bases in every cell that guided our
development from a fertilized egg, specifies how to make more
than 200 tissue types, and ties all this together in numerous
highly functional organ systems. Few people outside of genetics
or biochemistry realize that evolutionists still can provide no
substantive details at all about the origin of life, and
particularly the origin of genetic information in the first
self-replicating organism. What genes did it require — or did it
even have genes? How much DNA and RNA did it have — or did it
even have nucleic acids? How did huge information-rich molecules
arise before natural selection?
Exactly how did the genetic code linking nucleic acids to amino
acid sequence originate? Clearly the origin of life — the
foundation of evolution – is still virtually all speculation,
and little if no fact.
HTML https://dissentfromdarwin.org/2008/08/11/chris_williams_phd_biochemistr/
Gary, are you aware that all those Icons of Evolution we all
were told were "scientific evidence" (most STILL in biology
textbooks from grade school to university level!) are either
fanciful speculation or disingenuously mendacious fabrications?
I hope you don't still believe this pro-evolution propaganda
that has been scientifically proven to be false DECADES ago.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-020622162256.png[/center]
[center]The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man
looketh well to his going. -- Proverbs 14:15[/center]
#Post#: 704--------------------------------------------------
Gary Walker Defender of Evolution goes FULL Confirmation Bias
BACKFIRE EFFECT
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 12, 2022, 12:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-090422150144.png<br
/>Continued
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622153109-13691906.gif<br
/>from
"I do not deny any scientific evidence. The argument from
consequences that you make has NO effect on the validity of the
Theory of Evolution."
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg703/#msg703:
Gary Walker > Sober Thinking
Sorry but when over 99% of working biologists accept the Theory
of Evolution as valid, I will follow that consensus.
There is no "pro-evolution propaganda that has been
scientifically proven to be false DECADES ago. ", THAT is a
creationist lie and science denial.
You are NOT thinking sober, you are cherry picking your
"experts" to fit your conclusion. That is confirmation bias.
Before you can assert "god did it", you must provide evidence
that your god is real and good luck with that.
Sober Thinking > Gary Walker
It certainly is a sorry state when you refuse to even look at
the evidence. The "cherry picking" of experts is your straw man
argument. Those experts I cited gave EVIDENCE, not "opinions". I
listed their credentials so you could take them seriously as
scientists in order to objectively consider the FACTS, not their
opinions. You just refuse to look at the evidence objectively.
You criticized me for using an "argument from consequences", and
then you use the fallacious debating technique of "argument from
authority".
Also, the only one using Confirmation Bias here is YOU when you
use "99% of working biologists. (i.e. 'Darwinism is the
explanation that almost the entire world believes, so it's gotta
be true.'...) as your "proof" of Darwin's Theory INSTEAD of
scientific evidence.
Evolutionists argue that evolution is a fact, and that we ought
to focus on evolution’s successful predictions rather than its
false predictions. Criticism of evolution draws heated
responses, and personal attacks are common.
Such attacks, however, do not change the FACT that evolution has
generated many false predictions. Also, evolutionists sometimes
IGNORE or DENY the unexpected findings. They attempt to
DISCREDIT the FACTS, referring to them as “tired old arguments,”
or fallacies WITHOUT FOLLOWING UP such CRITICISMS WITH
SUPPORTING DETAILS.
You refuse to address the blatant falsehoods pushed in the
conclusions of Miller-Urey experment (STILL in most Biology
textbooks those 99% of working biologist true believers in
Darwin's Atheist Gospel eat up), and all the other Scientifc
Evidence I have mentioned, based on a type of confirmation bias
known as the Backfire Effect. The tendency to seek confirming
evidence over contrary evidence is known as confirmation bias.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-200422180351-8092457.png[/center]
One consequence of confirmation bias can be that confirming
evidence is viewed as correct and typical whereas disconfirming
evidence is viewed as anomalous and rare. Not surprisingly the
confirming evidence is more often retained and documented.
RARELY are the many false predictions found in evolution texts.
Confirmation bias can hinder scientific research as
evolutionists tend to view the predictions of evolution as
overwhelmingly true. Evolutionists argue, based on confirmation
bias, NOT scientifc evidence, that evolution is a fact, and that
we ought to focus on evolution’s successful predictions rather
than its false predictions. False predictions, on the other
hand, are usually not viewed as legitimate falsifications but
rather as open 😉research questions which are yet to be
resolved. Indeed, evolutionists often make the remarkable claim,
like you continue to make, that there is no evidence that is
contrary to evolution.
Gary Walker, school is out. You refuse to answer the question
about the physical constants that provide scientific evidence
that our Universe is not the result of random undirected
processes. You arm wave with distractions to change the subject
to the "amenable" Darwinian weeds in order to avoid addressing
the intellectual bankruptcy of the "Random Universe" Core
Evolution Theory Claim.
You make the breathtakingly illogical claim that I have to prove
the existence of God in order for you to believe the Scientifc
Evidence that invalidates the "Theory" of Evolution. Hey, if you
want to be an Atheist, that's your problem, but in this debate
we are supposed to be talking about SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, not
whether God exists or not. Yes, it is logical to conclude there
is a Superbeing outside of time and space that designed and
created the one, and ONLY, Universe, but the subject matter in
this debate is whether or not the "Theory" of Evolution has any
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE to back it. It doesn't. If it did, I would
be the first to accept it. There are many good people out there
that believe in God that have no issues with Darwin's "Theory".
As a Catholic Priest who believed in evolution told me when I
began to question it told me, "God could have done it any way He
wanted!". True, but the Scientific Evidence does not support the
Theistic Evolution worldview either.
To you, the tooth fairy and "God" are in the list of things you
do not believe in. Here is a partial list of things I do not
believe in: I do not believe in Astrology, the tooth fairy, the
fairy god mother and the Darwinist "Directed Panspermia" ID
LOONEY TOONS that you and fellow atheists think is a "plausible
alternative", despite irrefutable scientific EVIDENCE that our
Universe is NON-RANDOM.
I believe ALL humans are basically NOT intrinsically ethical,
though ALL humans who are not mentally retarded know the
difference between good and evil. I believe we are ALL basically
lovers of self. THAT is the reason humans DO EVIL. THAT (SEE:
Fallen Nature) is the reason we ALL need a Savior. I believe
that Jesus Christ bought my Salvation with His Death on the
Cross. He is my Lord and Savior.
I believe ONLY humans who WALK the "Do unto others as you would
have them do unto you." TALK are Christians. ALL Religious
Hypocrites that DO NOT WALK THE TALK are ANTI-Christians.
Faithfully following the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE is not
"situational ethics optional" for a Christian.
I believe there is more hope for atheists who do their ethical
best to live by the Golden Rule than for Anti-Christians who
pretend to do so. God is not mocked.
👉 "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a
man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his
flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to
the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." Galatians
6:7-8 ✨
Gary Walker, you do not wish to reason; you unreasonably cling
to your Darwinian belief system in the face of irrefutable
scientific evidence to the contrary. I will pray that, before
you die, God will Enlighten your darkness. I was an atheist from
the age of 18 to the age of 28, when I could no longer pretend
that the Universe is the result of random undirected processes.
I was a hard case. If God could 🕊 convince greedy,
adulterous, Republican moron me of the TRUTH, I am certain He
can 🕊 reach you.
For those who want to pursue the subject of whether or not
Evolution Theory is reality based, the following posts wilI be
of service.
🕯️ Dr Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist of
the British Museum of Natural History, wrote a book, Evolution.
In reply to a questioner who asked why he had not included any
pictures of transitional forms, he wrote: I fully agree with
your comments about the lack of direct illustration of
evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or
living, I would certainly have included them. …
📢 I will lay it on the line—there is not one such fossil
for which one could make a watertight argument.
"Darwin admitted that if no such links were discovered, then his
theory would be incorrect."
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg613/?topicseen#msg613
🕯️ June 2018 👉 I will not debate this
subject with you as long as you flat refuse to address
irrefutable points like the TIME it would ACTUALLY TAKE to
"evolve" a simple bacterium like Escherichia coli or any of
these other points:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg614/#msg614
🕯️ These scholarly references are important to
credible debate: "Many scientists doubt evolution, but they are
not cited or quoted in this paper. Only material from
evolutionists is used to illustrate that even adherents to the
theory agree that the predictions are false."
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg615/#msg615
🕯️ "It is not controversial that a great many
predictions made by Darwin’s theory of evolution have been found
to be false. There is less consensus, however, on how to
interpret these falsifications. In logic, when a hypothesis
predicts or entails an observation that is discovered to be
false, then the hypothesis is concluded to be false. Not so in
science.
When a scientific theory makes a prediction that is discovered
to be false, then sometimes the theory is simply modified to
accommodate the new finding. Broad, umbrella theories, such as
evolution, are particularly amenable to 😉 adjustments."
Read more:
Why investigate evolution’s false predictions?
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/sound-christian-doctrine/darwin/msg616/#msg616
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422142412.jpeg[/center]
Agelbert closing NOTE: Gary Walker went full Ad hominem after
the above post, true to the Backfire Effect. The graphics are
mine ;D.
Gary Walker > Sober Thinking
Every Scientific Organization supports the Theory of Evolution.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110822211037-18321080.jpeg
The Scientific conensus is that the Theory of Evolution is a
valid explanation of our biological origin.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-260322170319.png
Don't bother posting novels like this, I am not going to read
this bullshit, it is a waste of my time.
[center]
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817134803.gif[/center]
This was my last reply to him:
Sober Thinking > Gary Walker
Ad hominem is a fallacious debating technique. Try Science and
logic for a change. I have reported your post.
#Post#: 720--------------------------------------------------
"... mankind’s appearance on this planet was not
preordained, that we are 🦍 here … as an afterthought,
..."
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 19, 2022, 1:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/0dw8YyF37W9seZuHxa_iX6FKaH7_ouhJ1N1KxHEGZgqy6VVsm0TFNzpfkMZMCfB2iM2l8zev2ceMDf6kQORErtVPNq9reSRy9K_1gtNTqaF4h9JMvGyfBxxLy-_TypRHxj-6ZDAzv-6baNFzSw=s0-d-e1-ft#https://dot.discovery.org/l/563722/2018-06-25/3x6nzn/563722/91895/faith_science_header.jpg[/center]
November 30, 2022, 2:04 PM By Brian Miller 🕊️
[center]Attempts to Reconcile 🦍 Evolutionary Theory with
☝🏻 Christianity Lead to Intractable
Tensions[/center]
SNIPPET:
Christians no longer need to accept a secular intellectual
captivity. They can again embrace a historical understanding of
Christianity that coherently unifies faith with science and
provides a strong foundation to defend Christian ethical
teaching.
Full article:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422122257-657398.png
HTML https://evolutionnews.org/2022/11/attempts-to-reconcile-evolutionary-theory-with-christianity-lead-to-intractable-tensions/
[move]Because that which may be known of God is manifest in
them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things
of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being
understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power
and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: ~ Romans
1:19-20[/move]
#Post#: 721--------------------------------------------------
The Mother of All Chicken & Egg Problems
👨‍🔬
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 19, 2022, 2:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]The Mother of All Chicken & Egg Problems
👨‍🔬 (Your ☝🏻 Designed
Body)[/center]
[center][center]
HTML https://youtu.be/Y8CBTm2O5XI[/center][/center]
Discovery Science 180K subscribers
5,521 views Nov 29, 2022
Engineer Steve Laufmann
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422122257-657398.png<br
/>discusses "the mother of all chicken and egg problems" that
can
be found in the human body. Laufmann is co-author of the book
Your Designed Body:
HTML https://www.YourDesignedBody.com
Every day, your body must solve hundreds of hard engineering
problems simultaneously, or else you’ll die. In the book, Your
Designed Body, systems engineer Steve Laufmann and physician
Howard Glicksman explore this extraordinary system of thousands
of ingenious and interdependent engineering solutions that
impact your heart, your lungs, your feet, your eyes and ears,
and more.
Praise of Your Designed Body
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422180553-636818.gif
--- Quote ---
> “A masterful synthesis of modern medicine and
engineering.”—Stephen C. Meyer, PhD, author of Return of the God
Hypothesis
>
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> “Captivating… a magnificent and much-needed accomplishment—the
indispensable book on the intelligent design of the human
body.”—Michael Egnor, MD, Professor of Neurosurgery and
Pediatrics at State University of New York, Stony Brook
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> “A brilliant tour of the mind-boggling interactive complexity
of the human body.”—William S. Harris, PhD, Professor of
Internal Medicine, Sanford School of Medicine, University of
South Dakota
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> “I particularly enjoyed the way the authors tackled claims
about ‘botched design.’”—David Galloway, MD, former President,
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow
--- End Quote ---
About the Authors
Steve Laufmann is a computer scientist and consultant in the
engineering of enterprise-class computer systems. Dr. Howard
Glicksman is a general practitioner with more than forty years
of medical experience in office and hospital settings.
#Post#: 737--------------------------------------------------
The Mandelbrot Set: Atheists’ WORST Nightmare
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 26, 2022, 5:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]The Mandelbrot ☝🏻 Set: Atheists’ WORST
Nightmare[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/OlD2rcm971U[/center]
307,754 views Dec 16, 2022
In this powerful lecture, Dr. Jason Lisle 🕊️
reveals a secret code seen throughout creation: the Mandelbrot
set. Why is the Mandelbrot set atheists’ worst nightmare?
Because it reveals the infinite, intelligent mind of God in ways
that you’ve probably never seen before.
[move]You can watch the original full-length talk here: [/move]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/taKaFUNJ6Ec[/center]
Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world:
HTML https://AnswersinGenesis.org/give
#Post#: 744--------------------------------------------------
📢 "Academics are KNOWN to be COWARDS." James
Tour ✨ 👍
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 29, 2022, 4:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]James Tour ✨: Top 👨‍🔬
Scientist on ☝🏻 God and the Origin of
Life[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/qeuW2UPa1Lw[/center]
Jews for Jesus 28.9K subscribers 9,040 views Jun 24, 2022
We invite you to join us for Conversations with Jewish Believers
in Jesus, hosted by Jeff Morgan. This is the full interview
where Jeff talks with Jewish scientist James Tour
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422180554-644315.gif.
#Post#: 759--------------------------------------------------
Dr. Tour EXPOSES the False Science Behind Origin of Life
Research
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: January 4, 2023, 7:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]Dr. Tour EXPOSES the False Science Behind
🙊🙉🙈 Origin of Life Research
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418200018.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/v36_v4hsB-Y[/center]
197,397 views Oct 4, 2022 RICE UNIVERSITY
#abiogenesis #originoflife #evolution
00:00 Cold Open
00:25 Introduction
02:20 Dr. Tour's Presentation
55:53 Q&A
Departing from scientific consensus, Dr. Tour challenges the
findings of origin of life studies and the surrounding media
hype. This talk was presented by @RatioChristiOrg at
@riceuniversity.
Don't miss our new and upcoming episodes on Addressing
Abiogenesis, Season 2:
Episode 1:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050123170942.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/4rwPi1miWu4[/center]
Episode 2:
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/aUOZh4zmrXo[/center]
Episode 3:
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/v3A8_ezYlZY[/center]
Episode 4:
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/N_on6LK6Etc[/center]
Episode 5:
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/t5PfBzQUjW8[/center]
Episode 6 premieres next Monday! Subscribe to the channel so
you’ll be notified with the link!
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share!
====
Support us in creating more content across our different media
platforms.
Visit
HTML https://jesusandscience.org/#Support
to learn more.
🧐
#Post#: 772--------------------------------------------------
Dr. Tour UNMASKS Double-Standards & Inaccurate Commentary -
Steve Benner, Part 01
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: January 10, 2023, 12:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]Dr. Tour
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422180554-644315.gif<br
/>UNMASKS Double-Standards & Inaccurate Commentary -
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202527-13931485.png<br
/>Steve Benner, Part 01[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/ZtitTE2BavU[/center]
Dr. Tour UNMASKS Double-Standards & Inaccurate Commentary -
Steve Benner, Part 01
Dr. James Tour 52K subscribers 1,777 views Premiered January 9,
2023 #evolution #originoflife #abiogenesis
THIS is Episode 6 - Double-Standards, Lie Detectors, and
Inaccurate Commentary - Dr. Steve Benner, Part 01
In case you missed them:
Ep 1:
HTML https://youtu.be/4rwPi1miWu4
Ep 2:
HTML https://youtu.be/aUOZh4zmrXo
Ep 3:
HTML https://youtu.be/v3A8_ezYlZY
Ep 4:
HTML https://youtu.be/N_on6LK6Etc
Ep 5:
HTML https://youtu.be/t5PfBzQUjW8
[move]Episode 7 premieres next Monday, January 16th! SUBSCRIBE
so you'll be notified! [/move]
====
Support us in creating more content across our different media
platforms.
Visit
HTML https://jesusandscience.org/#Support
to learn more.
====
Check out all our episodes:
Addressing Abiogenesis, Season 2
HTML https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI...
Addressing Abiogenesis, Season 1
HTML https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI...
VIDEO INDEX
00:00 Memoirs of a Synthetic Chemist
03:04 On Autocatalysis & Insufficient Backgrounds
05:16 Fairytale Island — No Problems, No Cry
06:15 Synthetic Chemist "Embarrassing Blunders"
06:28 Synthesizing Double Standards
07:21 Chemistry Theory vs Reality
07:47 Benner's World of G-D Problems
09:35 Extra, Extra! Autocatalysis!
11:43 The Lie Detector
14:25 God of the Gaps? No.
16:06 RE: Religion: What Jim Said
16:51 What Was Steve Watching?
18:07 RE: Atmospheres: What Jim Said
19:26 Putting Words In Jim's Mouth
20:40 Jim Wants What?
24:44 RE: Sutherland et al
26:14 RE: Richert: What Jim Said
27:17 TL;DR — Steve's Comments, Misdirected
27:55 Next Time: Steve Benner, Part 02
#abiogenesis #originoflife #evolution
If you would like to support us in creating more content across
our different media platforms, we would greatly appreciate any
support you can give. Visit
HTML https://jesusandscience.org/#Support<br
/>to learn more.
God bless. ~
HTML https://jesusandscience.org
Dr Tour's Personal Website -
HTML http://jmtour.com
Twitter -
HTML http://twitter.com/drjamestour
Facebook -
HTML http://facebook.com/drjamestour
LinkedIn -
HTML http://linkedin.com/in/drjamestour
Instagram -
HTML http://instagram.com/drjamestour
Snapchat -
HTML http://snapchat.com/add/drjamestour
WeChat - @drjamestour
Newspaper Disclaimer:
The newspaper image used in this video ("Newspaper") is a
satirical creation, comprising individual and artificial
articles and titles, some taken from or inspired by real events,
but the stories, articles, and titles are entirely works of
fiction. The Newspaper is a source of parody, satire, and humor
and is for entertainment only. All content contained within the
Newspaper are works of fiction and constitute fake news. Any
truth or actual facts contained therein are purely incidental or
coincidental and are not intended to be, or be construed as,
facts.
The Newspaper may or may not use real names, always in
substantially fictitious ways. Any resemblance to actual facts
or to reality is purely coincidental, except for references to
famous persons and/or public figures, in which case such stories
may be based on real people, but the story, or stories,
surrounding or about these people or figures are entirely
fictional and/or are intended as satire, entertainment, and/or
teaching/criticism. The Newspaper’s content is written as
satire, entertainment, and/or teaching/criticism and not to
disparage any persons, or institutions, and no malice is
intended, nor should any be construed from the satirically based
content. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is entirely
coincidental or is intended purely as satire, parody or spoof of
such persons and is not intended to communicate any true or
factual information about that person.
The Newspaper is intended for a mature, sophisticated, and
discerning audience and is not intended for persons under 18
years of age.
#Post#: 784--------------------------------------------------
"Materialism is a weak flame that is blown out by the
breath of mature thinking."
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: January 16, 2023, 5:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://evolutionnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Logo-Box.png
January 16, 2023, 4:53 PM By John G. West
[center]Martin Luther King’s 📢 Powerful Critique of
🦍 Scientific Racism, Scientific Materialism[/center]
Editor’s note: This commentary was originally published on
January 18, 2019.
SNIPPET:
With regard to scientific racism, King 🕊️
lamented that “Science was commandeered to prove the biological
inferiority of the Negro” (p. 37) and he spoke of how 🦍
segregationists “turn to some 🦍 pseudo-scientific
writing and argue that the Negro’s brain is smaller than the
white man’s brain.” (p. 38) King 🕊️ argued that
the real findings of science didn’t support such claims: “They
do not know, or they refuse to know, that the idea of an
inferior or superior race has been refuted by the best evidence
of the science of anthropology… although there may be inferior
and superior individuals within all races, there is no superior
or inferior race.”
[center]With regard to scientific materialism, [b]King
🕊️ was searing:[/b][/center]
--- Quote ---
> To believe that human personality is the result of the
fortuitous interplay of atoms and electrons is as absurd as to
believe that a monkey by hitting typewriter keys at random will
eventually produce a Shakespearean play. Sheer magic! It is much
more sensible to say with Sir James Jeans, the physicist, that
“the universe seems to be nearer to a great thought than to a
great machine,” or with Arthur Balfour, the philosopher, that
“we now know too much about matter to be materialists.”
Materialism is a weak flame that is blown out by the breath of
mature thinking. (p. 70)
--- End Quote ---
King 🕊️ added in another chapter that “This
universe is not a tragic expression of meaningless chaos but a
marvelous display of orderly ☝🏻 cosmos ✨.”
(p. 128)
Full article:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422180554-644315.gif
HTML https://evolutionnews.org/2022/01/martin-luther-kings-powerful-critique-of-scientific-racism-scientific-materialism-5/
#Post#: 786--------------------------------------------------
Benner's D-Ribose is prebiotically irrelevant.
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: January 17, 2023, 3:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
January 16, 2023
🌟 This video
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422180553-643238.gif<br
/>includes an intentional mistranslation of a story told by Juan
Joya Borja, a Spanish comedian and actor known as "El Risitas"
("The Giggles"
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-210818163124-1669950.gif<br
/> in Spanish), as satire. Joya's hilarious story describes an
incident when he worked as a kitchen porter, and he left some
paella pans (paelleras) at night in the ocean to soak and clean
them, and in the morning when he returned to retrieve the pans,
they had washed out to sea with the tide. He frequently
interrupts the story with his trademark laugh. This story has
become a popular meme on the Internet, entertaining millions
with intentional mistranslations paired with Joya’s laugh. Thank
you "El Risitas" for blessing the Internet with this story and
your contagious laugh. May you rest in peace. For more on
Risitas and this meme, see
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Risitas
[center]Dr. Tour MINES Data on Origin of Life
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202527-13931485.png<br
/>Claims - Steve Benner, Part 02[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/cL0NIFk1grE[/center]
Dr. James Tour 53.7K subscribers
5,963 views Premiered 19 hours ago #abiogenesis #originoflife
#evolution
THIS is episode 7 - Digging Through The Data on Origin of Life
Claims - Dr. Steve Benner, Part 02
[move]Episode 8 premieres next Monday, January 23th! SUBSCRIBE
so you'll be notified! [/move]
After witnessing Dr. Steve Benner's misrepresentation of Dr.
Tour and his statements on origin of life (OOL), in this
episode, we now turn to Benner's chemistry. Looking beyond mere
titles and abstracts, we dig into Benner's data, exploring how
it suffers from excessive human involvement, despite Benner
himself criticizing the notion. After reminding us of the
Cannizzaro dilemma and how time presents a problem for synthetic
degradation, Dr. Tour
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422133654.gif<br
/>exposes how Benner's D-Ribose was just a needle in a haystack
of
other compounds, rendering it prebiotically irrelevant due to it
being completely useless for further reactions. Nevertheless,
Benner continues, claiming a
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202527-13931485.png<br
/>"hands off" approach, but using "hands on" from other
chemists,
who provide the alleged missing human involvement and relay
synthesis along the way, let alone, chemists whose papers reveal
they purchased chemicals as by-products from living sources,
rending those paths prebiotically irrelevant as well. Dr. Tour
also exposes OOL's problem of picking and choosing molecules
only when it strikes one's fancy, for example, magnesium
chloride and all the amino acids, while abrogating DAP's OOL
relevance to boot. Things are not so pure as they seem (and as
the chemistry requires), and chemists who extrapolate their
claims should simply know better.
====
Support us in creating more content across our different media
platforms.
Visit
HTML https://jesusandscience.org/#Support
to learn more.
====
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 11
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page