Re: Atheist Wakes Up In Morgue - After Meeting God
Alan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | alt.atheism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh |
|---|---|
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026-08-22 15:43, Skeeter wrote: > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says... >> >> On 2026-08-22 04:26, Andrew wrote: >>> "Alan" wrote in message news:[email protected]... >>>> Andrew wrote: >>>>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote: >>>>>> "Andrew" wrote: >>>>>>> "Attila" wrote >>>>>>>> "Andrew" wrote: >>>>>>> <<>> >>>>>>>>> Folks, if there is no plausible Darwinian pathway for our >>>>>>>>> origins, then pure logic points us to Creation by a most >>>>>>>>> awesome and wonderful Creator. . . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The process is not yet known, that's all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For those who accept what science has already discovered, there is >>>>>>> no debate. >>>>>>> They know that...., >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Life comes only from previously existing life. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is an established scientific law. >>>>> >>>>> Look it up, its called, "The Law of Biogenesis" >>>>> >>>>> "Life comes only from previously existing life." >>>> >>>> 'A Common Misconception >>> >>> Have any exceptions ever been note? >>> None, except in the fantasy world of >>> the fool. >>> >>>> Some creationists have argued that the law >>>> of biogenesis undermines evolutionary theory >>> >>> Yes, it undermines the "goo to you" deceptioen that >>> has deceived the gullible masses, who simply accept >>> whatever they are told. >>> >>>> and the theory that all life originated from >>>> inorganic material billions of years ago. >>> >>> What a bunch of unscientific nonsense! >>> >>>> However, biogenesis simply invalidates >>>> the theory of spontaneous generation? >>> >>> OK, so it's invalidated. And exposes >>> the fact that you have been deceived. >> All it invalidated was the idea that COMPLEX organisms arise sponteneously. > > They can't. What's your point? That that is all that was proven wrong. >> >> In specific, it disproved the notion that flies simply arise from >> rotting meat. > > Nope. >> Yup. That is literally the first way it was tested. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation#Pasteur_and_Tyndall> >> But you didn't bother even looking into it, did you? > > Unlike you who twists things all around? >> >>> >>>> it speaks to what can be accomplished in generational time spans, not >>>> over the >>>> course of thousands of generations or millions of years.' >>> >>> Which is the fantasy they taught you, not science. >> >> Nope. Lots of experiments have been run showing that the basic chemicals >> of life (amino acids in particular) can arise from simple compounds like >> ammonia and methane (et al): >> > > Where did the ammonia and methane come from? They're simple molecules that form spontaneously from free nitrogen, hydrogen and carbon. > >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment> >> >>> >>> But you accepted what they said. >>> >>> Because you were *gullible* >> >> And you believe a book... >> >> ...because the book tells you to believe it. > > You do when you read a science book. You have no argument. Nope. Because science books reference FACTS.