Lab-'evolved' Molecules Support Creation

ICR ^ | January 17, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

[tpanther]

Ummm too many people are onto DevNet whattajoke.

[tpanther]

...so that I violate the rules of this site.

You didn't fool anyone from day one with your current name...'cept maybe whattajoke and a few other liberals.

[tpanther]

I don’t know why this is relevant but I’m sure certain gases are results of chemical reactions in the gut that are taking place not necessarily in a solution.

And bone comes to mind.

Skin.

Hair.

Nails.

[DevNet]

When talking about me please follow protocol.

[theBuckwheat]

At the very same time evolutionists insist their theory is not about how life originated, there would be nothing to naturally select, and nothing to randomly mutate unless somehow living cells not only appeared but were sufficiently functional as to be able to successfully reproduce the very first time.

I have seen zero evidence that this ever happened, and what few theories that have been put forth are shamefully flimsy coming from such learned scientists and academics.

[Mojave]

Then correct me - what non-respiratory chemical reactions in the human body do not require a liquid solution of some sort?

There's more to a human body than a liquid solution of some sort. That was easy.

Now it's your turn for a question. Why isn't all medical research simply done in vitro?

[Mojave]

And bone comes to mind. Skin. Hair. Nails.

What? You mean that the human body isn't just a beaker of fluid?

[Blood of Tyrants]

The chances of a cell becoming a living being from non-living materials by accident is about 1 trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, times LESS likely than a tornado going through a junkyard and forming a perfectly operational jumbo jet.

[metmom]

“Even after they are carefully formed, they are very fragile. Just add water, oxygen, or light, and all the “evolutionary progress” of these molecules is destroyed.”

Water and O2 exist in the human body, yes?

Yes.

The destruction is the natural, uncontrolled result of being exposed to O2 and H2O.

So explain why they aren't destroyed then.

[DevNet]

You didn’t answer the question.

[DevNet]

The fact that we exist is proof that RNA isn’t destroyed.

[Mojave]

I did. You didn’t.

I’m waiting.

[metmom]

Creationists actually see this laboratory experiment as evidence of creation and deities?

Sorry, but your capacity for self-delusion has just hit a new high.

If you see a carefully designed experiment where supposedly intelligent scientists assemble some RNA as evidence of naturalistic, unguided, random, no intelligence allowed processes, I don't think that creationists are the ones who are deluded.

On what possible basis do you conclude that that in any way resembles or represents what scientists think MAY have happened somewhere in the remote past all on its own?

Why do evos expect us to believe that something could happen by accident that scientists aren't even able to make happen on purpose?

[Mojave]

"Indeed, certain ribonucleotides that are linked together to make RNA cannot form naturally in solutions."

You don't really expect them to address that point?

[GodGunsGuts]

Which makes them, by their own definition, “anti-science.”

[DevNet]

” what non-respiratory chemical reactions in the human body do not require a liquid solution of some sort”

I am unable to find a post from you detailing such a reaction - can you provide that information again? Perhaps my system wasn’t able to display your previous answer?

Now if you will excuse me I have a Core i7 system to design.

[GodGunsGuts]

Yep, they will believe just about anything so long as it does not involve God.

[metmom]

The fact that we exist is proof that RNA isn’t destroyed.

***bangs head on desk***

Focus here.

That doesn't explain why they weren't destroyed. That was not the question.

I wasn't looking for evidence that they weren't destroyed.

The question was...... The destruction is the natural, uncontrolled result of being exposed to O2 and H2O. So explain why they aren't destroyed then.

[metmom]

No.

[GodGunsGuts]

==Hype and hope in a test tube.

What do you expect, this is all they have to believe in.