1.6% of the North American population looks at the question, “How did the sequence-specific digital information necessary to building the first cell arise?” and replies, “Well, if a million monkeys typing for a billion years can turn out the complete works of Shakespear, then it’s a no brainer:
Inorganic and inanimate gases could evolve a complex formulated, specified code AND
Inorganic and inanimate gases could evolve a separate mechanism for translating that code AND
Inorganic and inanimate gases could have those two mechanisms evolve at the same time (since one is useless without the other) to be present in the first living cell so that the cell is not only allowed to exist but to replicate itself.
It just makes complete sense.”
These people know that without replication there is no natural selection
These people know that without the specified, formulated, coded, information already in place there is no replication.
These people know that it was not natural selection which brought about the evolution of the code and the separate mechanism to translate that code.
These people know that only intelligence is able to bring about a sequence-specific, formulated, code.
These people know these things but they say, “Chance did it!”
These people must maintain this implausible position or their belief system will collapse.
This is what these people are like. This is how they think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hehe, I had this feeling that after asking you simple questions about physics and math, you would prefer to turn to evolution instead of answering...
ReplyDeleteLet's address this post quickly anyway because you claim, once more, to know what atheists think, and present anti-scientific ideas as if there were atheists' ideas:
How did the sequence-specific digital information necessary to building the first cell arise?
If you want to discuss the origin of life on this planet, you go too far by starting with a cell. The question you need to ask is: How did the first self-replicating MOLECULES arise?
and replies, “Well, if a million monkeys typing for a billion years can turn out the complete works of Shakespear, then it’s a no brainer:
This "monkeys writing Shakespeare" idea has always made me laugh so hard... it does not make any sense; it is so far from being a good analogy to evolutionary biology... yet anti-evolution proponents will claim that this is what evolutionary biologists support. It only shows that anti-evolution proponents do not know what they are arguing against.
These people know that without replication there is no natural selection
WOW, one true statement!
These people know that without the specified, formulated, coded, information already in place there is no replication.
Oh, too bad, this one fails right after...
These people know that it was not natural selection which brought about the evolution of the code and the separate mechanism to translate that code.
Yes that's probably what happened, but it's hard to discuss because you also say...
These people know that only intelligence is able to bring about a sequence-specific, formulated, code.
So we know that you don't give a fuck about how it could have happened, you already have your conclusion. You see code NOW in cells, you decide that this code must be the product of a mind. Case closed. Let's close all the labs doing research on the transition from chemistry to biology, right? These guys are wasting their time... come on Rod, go tell the scientists who actually do research in this field that they are freaking morons to even look for natural explanations. YOU know how it works; you go tell them. What are you waiting for?
These people know these things but they say, “Chance did it!”
No, CHEMISTRY did it! :D
Oh and you're answer if much much clever of course...
God did it! using... a supernatural magic trick!
These people must maintain this implausible position or their belief system will collapse.
I am still waiting to find out what this belief system is; it's quite intriguing...
This is what these people are like. This is how they think.
The fact that every single time you write something like 'Atheists think that..." someone will tell you NO YOU FUCKING IDIOT THIS IS NOT WHAT I THINK is completely irrelevant to you, right? You prefer to just continue, again and again, to claim that you KNOW what these people are like. You KNOW how they think.
Isn't it what's so ironic about all these posts you write Rod? You keep on claiming that you know how other people think, and they keep telling you, no, this is not what I think, and then you just go on repeating the same things they already told you they do not think nor believe.
Ok ok, I know, you're just fooling around, laughing at us when we reply to your stupid comments and misrepresentations, because you do it on purpose? Nah, that would mean you're actually intelligent and really understand what you write, and that is not the case obviously because you make so many mistakes... Never mind, I thought for a second there that you might be smart. Sorry for the mistake.