gone to bed

ooman:

At this point i have to show you, i just wrote some theories above and you gave a sharp rejection.

I would love to show you how species change to another by changes in genome in bacteria, how life came from non life by disintegrating and reintegrating viral genome and incorporation into eukaryotic genome.

I can't just tell you anymore, you won't believe, i have to show you, but sorry, right now, that is not just possible.

But what i can tell you is that i see evolution at work everyday.

Do you think i would simply decide to go to hell if there are no real evidence of the absence of God?

It really doesnt take more than 5 mins to write this. You've been here on this thread over 24 hrs... suddenly you have "no time" to provide evidence to your claims? What is the "evolution" you see at work everyday? Where is this evidence?

i_am_model: "Those who deny God wouldn't have deny Him if He does not exist, for their denial is not complete if they did not exist". T. S Elliot.

May God give you a reason to believe...

Quoting someone that supports you doesnt mazke you right or smart.

If you have nothing to say, why not gerrout or sharrap?

ooman:

At this point i have to show you, i just wrote some theories above and you gave a sharp rejection.

I would love to show you how species change to another by changes in genome in bacteria, how life came from non life by disintegrating and reintegrating viral genome and incorporation into eukaryotic genome.

I can't just tell you anymore, you won't believe, i have to show you, but sorry, right now, that is not just possible.

But what i can tell you is that i see evolution at work everyday.

Do you think i would simply decide to go to hell if there are no real evidence of the absence of God?

davidylan:

It really doesnt take more than 5 mins to write this. You've been here on this thread over 24 hrs... suddenly you have "no time" to provide evidence to your claims? What is the "evolution" you see at work everyday? Where is this evidence?

Please I will also appreciate if can quote published journals that have been accepted as evidence in your field and please stop being condescending I can handle advanced biology.

davidylan:

It really doesnt take more than 5 mins to write this. You've been here on this thread over 24 hrs... suddenly you have "no time" to provide evidence to your claims? What is the "evolution" you see at work everyday? Where is this evidence?

Besides, when we are talking about "evidence" then we are not talking in theory but in practicals, you understand now. Except if you want us to debate the philosophy of science, then i will stop being so empirical with you.

Just tell me to change to philosophical aspect of evolution and that is it. But as long as you want evidence, then you have to see because i can't "tell" you evidence, i can only show you.

Logicboy03:


Quoting someone that supports you doesnt mazke you right or smart.

If you have nothing to say, why not gerrout or sharrap?

then why do atheists spend all their time quoting other atheists, copying shamelessly from atheist websites...?

Logicboy03:


Quoting someone that supports you doesnt mazke you right or smart.

If you have nothing to say, why not gerrout or sharrap?

Can you at least try and keep it civilized? I thought as an atheist with a superior level of thinking, you'll maintain a level of decorum.

ooman:

I just gave some evidence and you rejected my views how many time will i tell you that.

Seeing is believing. Science is not like religion that expects you to believe by faith, if what i told you is not enough, then i need to show you.

I'm sorry, you posted a list of claims that make no sense. That is not the same as "evidence".

chukkynwob:

Can you at least try and keep it civilized? I thought as an atheist with a superior level of thinking, you'll maintain a level of decorum.

Look at this tone troll. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tone%20troll



Did I insult you in my last comment? Why are you complaining about being civilized?

davidylan:


I'm sorry, you posted a list of claims that make no sense. That is not the same as "evidence".

Exactly, they make no sense because 1) you dont understand them 2) you havent seen them in action.

what is the aim of living then? to die? definitely not to praise God though.
to answer this question correctly, you have to be standing from the view point of eternity or you are Time itself.
maybe we are not the ones living... maybe it is the planets and the galaxies that are living and we are just to them as red blood cells are to us...


or maybe we are a bodily definition of another being... a being from another place or dimension that needed to use earth and then decided they needed a vehicle suitable for this planet and then made human bodies...

does it not bother you people that we are able to invent things... how they are left like clues.... in such a way that nature is like (if they invent this one, give them this problem)

or how is it that we are able to invent at all.. that we are able to associate with these things around in nature and use them? does it not mean they were made by beings with our same form of perception albeit higher order of intelligence?

we are definitely not in control of our lives. a lot of weird shit happens daily. like staying in your house and a freaking plane crashes on top of your house.
this is not necessarily done by an angry God. it is most likely the job of a system rectifying itself.

the universe does not care about right or wrong, it only cares about balance.

I develop softwares and sometimes I wonder how variables in the system would feel when during execution I suddenly delete them, probably because of low memory. other variables will think that its an accident, even the variable that caused the memory full error will be unaware of what it caused. also the delete function that deleted the variable has no idea what it did

what I am trying to say is that humans are the ones that influence the world. we can't understand it. its like the thumb tring to understand the whole body system.

ooman:

Exactly, they makes no sense because 1) you dont understand them 2) you havent seen them in action.

More likely you dont understand them since you have been unable to explain them since... merely appealing to authority then lying about going to sleep. Any 2-yr old can produce textbook titles... i need a detailed explanation (doesnt need to go beyond 3-5 lines) of exactly how science proved the earth could be created without God. Thanks again.

lordZOUGA: what is the aim of living then? to die? definitely not to praise God though.
to answer this question correctly, you have to be standing from the view point of eternity or you are Time itself.
maybe we are not the ones living... maybe it is the planets and the galaxies that are living and we are just to them as red blood cells are to us...


or maybe we are a bodily definition of another being... a being from another place or dimension that needed to use earth and then decided they needed a vehicle suitable for this planet and then made human bodies...

does it not bother you people that we are able to invent things... how they are left like clues.... in such a way that nature is like (if they invent this one, give them this problem)

or how is it that we are able to invent at all.. that we are able to associate with these things around in nature and use them? does it not mean they were made by beings with our same form of perception albeit higher order of intelligence?

we are definitely not in control of our lives. a lot of weird shit happens daily. like staying in your house and a freaking plane crashes on top of your house.
this is not necessarily done by an angry God. it is most likely the job of a system rectifying itself.

the universe does not care about right or wrong, it only cares about balance.

I develop softwares and sometimes I wonder how variables in the system would feel when during execution I suddenly delete them, probably because of low memory. other variables will think that its an accident, even the variable that caused the memory full error will be unaware of what it caused. also the delete function that deleted the variable has no idea what it did

what I am trying to say is that humans are the ones that influence the world. we can't understand it. its like the thumb tring to understand the whole body system.

Guy! Stop watching the matrix!


I understand what you are saying though!

ooman:

I just gave some evidence and you rejected my views how many time will i tell you that.

Seeing is believing. Science is not like religion that expects you to believe by faith, if what i told you is not enough, then i need to show you.

Sodium reacts with Chlorine to give NaCl₂ that is hard scientific evidence,if this is new evidence that is not yet universally accepted link us to publications that have been approved by a scientific body with authority in the field of genetics or relevant fields.

Lets say I believe you and become an atheist, dont you think going about with "Ooman said this and that on nairaland..." will make me look ridiculously stupid?

davidylan:

you could keep quiet if you have nothing cerebral to add to the topic. Just saying...

That's exactly my point to you, see? Again, what does your tangent have to do with the op?

chukkynwob:


Sodium reacts with Chlorine to give NaCl₂ that is hard scientific evidence,if this is new evidence that is not yet universally accepted link us to publications that have been approved by a scientific body with authority in the field of genetics or relevant fields.

Lets say I believe you and become an atheist, dont you think going about with "Ooman said this and that on nairaland..." will make me look ridiculously stupid?

Said it better than i could ever say it. Thanks. Over to you prof. ooman.

Logicboy03:


Guy! Stop watching the matrix!


I understand what you are saying though!

that was not influenced by matrix

davidylan:

More likely you dont understand them since you have been unable to explain them since... merely appealing to authority then lying about going to sleep. Any 2-yr old can produce textbook titles... i need a detailed explanation (doesnt need to go beyond 3-5 lines) of exactly how science proved the earth could be created without God. Thanks again.

If you need detailed explanation then sorry, i have to go beyond 5 lines for how the earth evolved to be in its place, its not child's story that can be summarized

chukkynwob:


Sodium reacts with Chlorine to give NaCl₂ that is hard scientific evidence,if this is new evidence that is not yet universally accepted link us to publications that have been approved by a scientific body with authority in the field of genetics or relevant fields.

Lets say I believe you and become an atheist, dont you think going about with "Ooman said this and that on nairaland..." will make me look ridiculously stupid?

, its science.

Exactly what am trying to tell you. saying that "ooman showed me evolution in his lab" would sound more convincing. You understand now.

Deal with this. "New strain of bacteria evolved by modifying the DNA material in their environment" how does that prove anything to you, no way, but is it real, yes. get it?

davidylan:

Said it better than i could ever say it. Thanks. Over to you prof. ooman.

I find it insulting when ooman assumes other people lack the intellectual capacity to understand genetics, heck i could decide to get a degree in genetics for the fun of it.

Davidllan by the way I really like how you argue, you argue with the hope of learning or refuting unsound claims of scientific breakthrough where it is obvious there is dearth of one

chukkynwob:

I find it insulting when ooman assumes other people lack the intellectual capacity to understand genetics, heck i could decide to get a degree in genetics for the fun of it.

Davidllan by the way I really like how you argue, you argue with the hope of learning or refuting unsound claims of scientific breakthrough where it is obvious there is dearth of one

Its a free world, go learn genetics. Nigeria need more geneticist anyway except dont plan to work in Nigeria, you would regret ever studying genetics. You people dont know the use of genetics here. My advice is that you study law, medicine, pharmacy, banking and finance, Bus admin etc

chukkynwob:

I find it insulting when ooman assumes other people lack the intellectual capacity to understand genetics, heck i could decide to get a degree in genetics for the fun of it.

Davidllan by the way I really like how you argue, you argue with the hope of learning or refuting unsound claims of scientific breakthrough where it is obvious there is dearth of one

that's why i simply restricted myself to asking him to prove his claims... its funny how these folks think they are the only ones around here who has ever seen a science book. My guess is ooman is still an undergraduate who has just started his first 1-2 genetics classes and now thinks he knows better than everyone else.

ooman:

Its a free world, go learn genetics. Nigeria need more geneticist anyway except dont plan to work in Nigeria, you would regret ever studying genetics. You people dont know the use of genetics here. My advice is that you study law, medicine, pharmacy, banking and finance, Bus admin etc

well help us use genetics to explain evolution... that should be the bread and butter for anyone who has ever spent at least 2 yrs in a foundational genetics class. It would be better than the arrogant fallacy of argumentum ad verecundiam.

ooman:

If you need detailed explanation then sorry, i have to go beyond 5 lines for how the earth evolved to be in its place, its not child's story that can be summarized, its science.

Exactly what am trying to tell you. saying that "ooman showed me evolution in his lab" would sound more convincing. You understand now.

Deal with this. "New strain of bacteria evolved by modifying the DNA material in their environment" how does that prove anything to you, no way, but is it real, yes. get it?

you dont need more than 5 lines to succinctly explain yourself... or at best point us to a peer-reviewed publication where we can find this evidence. If you need more than 5 lines then you really dont know what you are saying.

ooman:

If you need detailed explanation then sorry, i have to go beyond 5 lines for how the earth evolved to be in its place, its not child's story that can be summarized, its science.

Exactly what am trying to tell you. saying that "ooman showed me evolution in his lab" would sound more convincing. You understand now.

Deal with this. "New strain of bacteria evolved by modifying the DNA material in their environment" how does that prove anything to you, no way, but is it real, yes. get it?

Which lab? Methodology of the experiment? has it been published? has it been accepted? Did the bacteria emerge from nothing? or a new strand from an already existing strand? a lot of question are going on in my head about this new breakthrough.

oomen you must realize you are talking with educated people,if you are still working on your theories perfect them,if you are done send me a pdf or a blog link...so I can educate myself more.

Besides I posted some major faults of the existing evolutionary theory and you didn't even attempt to clarify me on the points I raised on the theory.

ooman: Deal with this. "New strain of bacteria evolved by modifying the DNA material in their environment" how does that prove anything to you, no way, but is it real, yes. get it?

Did it "evolve" or did it "mutate"? these are two different things. the scientific strawman of trying to link mutation to "evolution" has been discussed and dismissed so many times. Transgenic mice are commonplace in many western biomedical labs... yet we dont call them "evolved" mice.

davidylan:

that's why i simply restricted myself to asking him to prove his claims... its funny how these folks think they are the only ones around here who has ever seen a science book. My guess is ooman is still an undergraduate who has just started his first 1-2 genetics classes and now thinks he knows better than everyone else.

The above is funny, do you really have to hurt my feeling to get satisfied?

davidylan:

well help us use genetics to explain evolution... that should be the bread and butter for anyone who has ever spent at least 2 yrs in a foundational genetics class. It would be better than the arrogant fallacy of argumentum ad verecundiam.

davidylan:

I am but you are not keeping an open mind, did you see my recent post : "New strain of bacteria evolved by modifying the DNA material in their environment" how does that prove anything to you, no way, but is it real, yes."

you dont need more than 5 lines to succinctly explain yourself... or at best point us to a peer-reviewed publication where we can find this evidence. If you need more than 5 lines then you really dont know what you are saying.

Are you really sure about that. I just told you that big b.ang caused cosmos and you rejected it. the big b.ang itself caused by concentration of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed. it is eternal, older than God (though i know God does not exist, its a figure of speech), it is omnipresent and is in everything, everything is made of energy, because the very baryons that makes you up (pls tell me you understand that or google it) are made of energy.

Now if energy cannot be created or destroyed, what did God create in the beginning? Except you will say that the verified chemical law is not evidence again.

Heatblast: Me sef tire, one would expect that people who believe in a ultra rich sky daddy would be richer/ better than those who don't, but its the exact opposite, Aficans believe in a god more than the rest of the world combined(that's just me guessing) yet poverty rules unchallanged. We are always waiting for aid form the godless nations(compared to us) Take Nigeria for example, every friday and sunday, continious disturbance, yet no change.

All this happens because most of them ve all deviated from the through calling of Christ, which is Love. They are now lovers of themselves. If ye truly love thyselves, you will do thyselves no harm.

chukkynwob:


Which lab? Methodology of the experiment? has it been published? has it been accepted? Did the bacteria emerge from nothing? or a new strand from an already existing strand? a lot of question are going on in my head about this new breakthrough.

oomen you must realize you are talking with educated people,if you are still working on your theories perfect them,if you are done send me a pdf or a blog link...so I can educate myself more.

Besides I posted some major faults of the existing evolutionary theory and you didn't even attempt to clarify me on the points I raised on the theory.

ah, you are far from science. Everyday, scientists make new strain of bacteria to work with, all we have to do is to modify the DNA. Obviously you are no scientist, so i forgive you

sorry but what you posted showed lack of understanding of the evolutionary theory.

ooman: The above is funny, do you really have to hurt my feeling to get satisfied?

Nope. Sorry.

ooman:
Are you really sure about that. I just told you that big b.ang caused cosmos and you rejected it. the big b.ang itself caused by concentration of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed. it is eternal, older than God (though i know God does not exist, its a figure of speech), it is omnipresent and is in everything, everything is made of energy, because the very baryons that makes you up (pls tell me you understand that or google it) are made of energy.

This must be a joke. Your description of "energy" here is the same description for God!

honestly though, it takes more faith to believe this than it takes to believe in God.
So who created the first energy or has it always existed in a vacuum? So

ooman:
Now if energy cannot be created or destroyed, what did God create in the beginning? Except you will say that the verified chemical law is not evidence again.

So scientists somehow went back to way before the big b.ang to determine that indeed energy can never ever ever be destroyed?

ooman:

ah, you are far from science. Everyday, scientists make new strain of bacteria to work with, all we have to do is to modify the DNA. Obviously you are no scientist, so i forgive you

sorry but what you posted showed lack of understanding of the evolutionary theory.

Are transgenic mice considered "evolved" mice?

davidylan:

Nope. Sorry.



This must be a joke. Your description of "energy" here is the same description for God!

honestly though, it takes more faith to believe this than it takes to believe in God.
So who created the first energy or has it always existed in a vacuum? So



So scientists somehow went back to way before the big b.ang to determine that indeed energy can never ever ever be destroyed?

That is because the God you worship is energy i work with in my lab.

I just told you that energy cannot be [b]created [/b]or destroyed and you still have to ask me who created the "first" energy?. There is no first energy. It is the same energy. Energy can only be converted, it cannot be created or destroyed. This is verified evidence.

You just rejected one of the most simple yet important, short yet verified theory in science, how then will you believe the broad theory of evolution.

Did i hear you say it takes more faith to believe that energy cannot be create or destroyed than to believe in God? if that is true, then you must have seen God.

Have you seen God?

If nothing comes from nothing, where did God come from. I have an hypothesis about that, God evolved from energy, how does that sound to you.

ooman:

The above is funny, do you really have to hurt my feeling to get satisfied?

Are you really sure about that. I just told you that big b.ang caused cosmos and you rejected it. the big b.ang itself caused by concentration of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed. it is eternal, older than God (though i know God does not exist, its a figure of speech), it is omnipresent and is in everything, everything is made of energy, because the very baryons that makes you up (pls tell me you understand that or google it) are made of energy.

Now if energy cannot be created or destroyed, what did God create in the beginning? Except you will say that the verified chemical law is not evidence again.

Do you know that the big bang theory in itself shoots holes into your arguments? Energy can not be created nor destroyed and the world came about from energy.

Does it sound remotely like 'let there be light'?