Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Disproving Creation: The Genome Disproves Intelligent Design
63 views
Skip to first unread message
Budikka666
Nov 7, 2012, 5:21:48 PM11/7/12
to
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
Junk DNA:
"Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our genome. The rest
includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk with no
discernible function."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/06/06/will-we-ever-clone-a-mammoth/
Our close relationship with other animals:
"Rather than producing mammoth DNA from scratch, you could tweak DNA
from an African elephant. The genomes of the two species differ by
just 0.6 percent, half the difference between us and chimpanzees."
Humans closer to chimpanzees than rats are to mice, so if rats and
mice are the same family ("kind") then so are we and chimpanzees.
In short, creationism is as wrong as you can get.
No *intelligent* designer would screw up the genomelike ours is, with
repetitive sequences, junk, viral intrusions and broken genes.
Budikka
Junk DNA:
"Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our genome. The rest
includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk with no
discernible function."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/06/06/will-we-ever-clone-a-mammoth/
Our close relationship with other animals:
"Rather than producing mammoth DNA from scratch, you could tweak DNA
from an African elephant. The genomes of the two species differ by
just 0.6 percent, half the difference between us and chimpanzees."
Humans closer to chimpanzees than rats are to mice, so if rats and
mice are the same family ("kind") then so are we and chimpanzees.
In short, creationism is as wrong as you can get.
No *intelligent* designer would screw up the genomelike ours is, with
repetitive sequences, junk, viral intrusions and broken genes.
Budikka
Andrew
Nov 7, 2012, 7:03:48 PM11/7/12
to
"Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> wrote in message news:f71df8f8-f8f8-4323...@e6g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
http://www.p2l.it/1fs
"They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to
regulate gene expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off
switches for protein encoding DNA. ENCODE project
results were published by Nature, Scientific American,
New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk"
when He created the DNA for all living things..after all.
There really IS a Creator.
Worship Him!
> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>
> Junk DNA:
> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to
> be useless junk with no discernible function."
No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>
> Junk DNA:
> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to
> be useless junk with no discernible function."
http://www.p2l.it/1fs
"They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to
regulate gene expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off
switches for protein encoding DNA. ENCODE project
results were published by Nature, Scientific American,
New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk"
when He created the DNA for all living things..after all.
There really IS a Creator.
Worship Him!
Smiler
Nov 7, 2012, 8:13:40 PM11/7/12
to
Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>
> There really IS a Creator.
>
> Worship Him!
Nope.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Ken
Nov 7, 2012, 9:07:18 PM11/7/12
to
On Nov 7, 4:01 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote nothing
worth repeating, just the usual goditit BS
Doesn't it hurt to be so fucking stupid, Amdy?
worth repeating, just the usual goditit BS
Doesn't it hurt to be so fucking stupid, Amdy?
Andrew
Nov 9, 2012, 1:20:50 PM11/9/12
to
"Smiler" wrote in message news:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
> Andrew wrote:
> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about
the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
for life in all things, plant or animal.
Worship Him!
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>
>>> Junk DNA:
>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
>>> with no discernible function."
>>
>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>
> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>
>>> Junk DNA:
>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
>>> with no discernible function."
>>
>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>
> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
for life in all things, plant or animal.
Worship Him!
Caranx latus
Nov 9, 2012, 1:59:10 PM11/9/12
to
that DNA have mutated into a form in which there is "junk"? Assuming
that you claim that junk DNA simply doesn't exist, wouldn't that mean
that the number of genes that an organism has should somehow reflect on
its complexity?
Andrew
Nov 9, 2012, 2:06:06 PM11/9/12
to
"Caranx latus" wrote in message news:7ncns.9135$763....@fe16.iad...
No.
Caranx latus
Nov 9, 2012, 2:14:17 PM11/9/12
to
manufacture more proteins than organisms with smaller genomes. If these
proteins are manufactured but not used for something, doesn't that make
them junk?
Devils Advocaat
Nov 9, 2012, 3:23:55 PM11/9/12
to
On 9 Nov, 19:04, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Caranx latus" wrote in messagenews:7ncns.9135$763....@fe16.iad...
> >>> Andrew wrote:
> >>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
> >>>>>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/deciphe...
> "Caranx latus" wrote in messagenews:7ncns.9135$763....@fe16.iad...
> > On 11/9/2012 1:20 PM, Andrew wrote:
> >> "Smiler" wrote in messagenews:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
> >>> Andrew wrote:
> >>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
> >>>>>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/deciphe...
>
> >>>>> Junk DNA:
> >>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> >>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
> >>>>> with no discernible function."
>
> >>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
> >>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
> >>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
> >>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
> >>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
> >>>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>
> >>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>
> >> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>
> >> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about
> >> the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
> >> did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
> >> for life in all things, plant or animal.
>
> > Assuming for the sake of argument that God did create DNA, why couldn't that DNA have mutated into a form in which there is
> > "junk"? Assuming that you claim that junk DNA simply doesn't exist, wouldn't that mean that the number of genes that an organism
> > has should somehow reflect on its complexity?
>
> No.
So you are as good as saying there has been no Fall.
> >>>>> Junk DNA:
> >>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> >>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
> >>>>> with no discernible function."
>
> >>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
> >>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
> >>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
> >>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
> >>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
> >>>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>
> >>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>
> >> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >>> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>
> >> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about
> >> the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
> >> did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
> >> for life in all things, plant or animal.
>
> > Assuming for the sake of argument that God did create DNA, why couldn't that DNA have mutated into a form in which there is
> > "junk"? Assuming that you claim that junk DNA simply doesn't exist, wouldn't that mean that the number of genes that an organism
> > has should somehow reflect on its complexity?
>
> No.
Seth lePod
Nov 9, 2012, 7:43:59 PM11/9/12
to
On Nov 9, 11:18 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Smiler" wrote in messagenews:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Budikka666" wrote:
> >>>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/deciphe...
does it say that all DNA is functional.
A participant in ENCODE I read an interview
with estimates that a bit less than 20 percent
of the genome will eventually be shown to
be doing anything useful. Right now that
figure stands at around 9 percent.
(hint: being transcribed into RNA does not
demonstrate that the resulting RNA does
anything further)
Here, read an analysis with a bit more depth:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/09/27/jonathan-wells-talks-about-history/
:
totally falsify so sweeping a claim. Just one section.
Guess what: the current estimate is that eight percent
of the human genome is due to insertion of DNA from
viruses.
Guess what else: your genome is littered with ancient
genes which no longer work. Care to guess why you are
capable of getting scurvy, while the great great majority of
mammals can not?
(I'm taking bets: at this point Andrew will claim that
our DNA was "perfect", but has been munged since The
Fall. He will say this without feeling the slightest
Seth
> "Smiler" wrote in messagenews:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Budikka666" wrote:
> >>>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/deciphe...
>
> >>> Junk DNA:
> >>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> >>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
> >>> with no discernible function."
>
> >> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
> >> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
> >> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
> >> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
> >> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
> >> the DNA for all living things..after all.
:
> >>> Junk DNA:
> >>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
> >>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
> >>> with no discernible function."
>
> >> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
> >> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
> >> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
> >> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
> >> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
> >> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
> >> the DNA for all living things..after all.
> >> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
> >> the DNA for all living things..after all.
:
> > Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
:
> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
Didn't actually read that, did you? It in no sense
> >> the DNA for all living things..after all.
:
> > Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
:
> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
does it say that all DNA is functional.
A participant in ENCODE I read an interview
with estimates that a bit less than 20 percent
of the genome will eventually be shown to
be doing anything useful. Right now that
figure stands at around 9 percent.
(hint: being transcribed into RNA does not
demonstrate that the resulting RNA does
anything further)
Here, read an analysis with a bit more depth:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/09/27/jonathan-wells-talks-about-history/
:
> > Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
:
> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood
> about the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our
> Creator did not make "junk" when He created the DNA
> required for life in all things, plant or animal.
So, one single stretch of non-functional DNA would
:
> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood
> about the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our
> Creator did not make "junk" when He created the DNA
> required for life in all things, plant or animal.
totally falsify so sweeping a claim. Just one section.
Guess what: the current estimate is that eight percent
of the human genome is due to insertion of DNA from
viruses.
Guess what else: your genome is littered with ancient
genes which no longer work. Care to guess why you are
capable of getting scurvy, while the great great majority of
mammals can not?
(I'm taking bets: at this point Andrew will claim that
our DNA was "perfect", but has been munged since The
Fall. He will say this without feeling the slightest
Seth
Budikka666
Nov 9, 2012, 8:04:17 PM11/9/12
to
All Flee & Hide All-Seeing-| Ran:
http://tinyurl.com/3zmbfku
http://tinyurl.com/6w3mbrr
http://tinyurl.com/cp8de7y
http://tinyurl.com/77tkgdk
All-Seeing-| denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/836mqf8
http://tinyurl.com/6lj584p
http://tinyurl.com/7pz5ljp
BrailJOB the LiarBoi Loonbag DENYING Jesus THRICE, shrinking away like
a limp Peter at the passion:
http://tinyurl.com/6kck7b5
http://tinyurl.com/7d2s93z
http://tinyurl.com/6wyp6se
The above are included in the following examples of BrailJOB running in
every single case when he was given ONE HUNDRED Opportunities to
witness for his LORD:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/c69a90d07c0a4d79
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
god:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
cbe97ddc53be5a00?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/59b246e0c8e3e4f9?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/8cpp6ru
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9rm86aj
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning
tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he
has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me up
on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/8o3wsmg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
ec1a84272b3493f1?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the Noahic
flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that
he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank
coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his
worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god,
and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god
to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9hpgy2v
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
db798efe8d1d0c97?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific evidence
in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist Coward-For-
Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES
by turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If
there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any
faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have
taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/986crjk
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running
like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH
in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator
god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that
god to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/ckeaadm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
c786b453f00abb9a?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not truly
believe in this god he espouses!
End of story.
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in *another*
SIX THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zghp7o
http://tinyurl.com/76a8chm
http://tinyurl.com/6q3q498
http://tinyurl.com/6n2swsr
http://tinyurl.com/7rvtlyu
http://tinyurl.com/7x4m3fv
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
another* TEN THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zcuwsb
http://tinyurl.com/7t47anq
http://tinyurl.com/7wvegqc
http://tinyurl.com/6rg67wc
http://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fw
http://tinyurl.com/77bopo8
http://tinyurl.com/86zwhj6
http://tinyurl.com/7zlzxtd
http://tinyurl.com/7eknx73
http://tinyurl.com/6lgcwpq
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
BilliBoi Chicken Bill Ran:
http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu
Coward-For-Christ™ Calvin Ramsey Denying Christ Thrice:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e789f4adad4e8fad?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5ddc9354493b62b3?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5cfb83a18dbc7442?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Codebreaker Ran:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5868cad2d0302527/f756e4d43ab0ae9f?q=Where+is+the+Soul%3F
+group:alt.atheism+author:Budikka#f756e4d43ab0ae9f
Duck & Run Duke Ran:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/0cb3889ae3bd41dd
Duck & Run Duke Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/867lax4
http://tinyurl.com/7kawokn
http://tinyurl.com/3brposl
Flatnads Fasghnad RAN:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/58c9df7a83bdd7e3?scoring=d&
IlNeverBeBauck IlBeBauck Ran:
http://tinyurl.com/3efeute
http://tinyurl.com/7ppk3mq
http://tinyurl.com/7trpdte
http://tinyurl.com/82fte2a
http://tinyurl.com/6n5pj4u
IlNeverBebauck denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
http://tinyurl.com/7od78wt
http://tinyurl.com/7abfajg
Joe Bruno Ran away:
http://tinyurl.com/8m38v5w
Patrick denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7l5hyw5
US4Lyin' US4ZION Ran
http://tinyurl.com/79f9oxx
US4ZION Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7oqwbqq
http://tinyurl.com/7rpq6ch
http://tinyurl.com/7pj5ut5
Old Man Joke Old Man Joe ran:
http://tinyurl.com/887lhzh
Zacharias Mulletstein Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7a47jy8
Budikka
http://tinyurl.com/3zmbfku
http://tinyurl.com/6w3mbrr
http://tinyurl.com/cp8de7y
http://tinyurl.com/77tkgdk
All-Seeing-| denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/836mqf8
http://tinyurl.com/6lj584p
http://tinyurl.com/7pz5ljp
BrailJOB the LiarBoi Loonbag DENYING Jesus THRICE, shrinking away like
a limp Peter at the passion:
http://tinyurl.com/6kck7b5
http://tinyurl.com/7d2s93z
http://tinyurl.com/6wyp6se
The above are included in the following examples of BrailJOB running in
every single case when he was given ONE HUNDRED Opportunities to
witness for his LORD:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/c69a90d07c0a4d79
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
god:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
cbe97ddc53be5a00?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/59b246e0c8e3e4f9?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/8cpp6ru
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9rm86aj
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning
tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he
has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me up
on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/8o3wsmg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
ec1a84272b3493f1?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the Noahic
flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that
he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank
coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his
worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god,
and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god
to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9hpgy2v
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
db798efe8d1d0c97?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific evidence
in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist Coward-For-
Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES
by turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If
there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any
faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have
taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/986crjk
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running
like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH
in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator
god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that
god to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/ckeaadm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
c786b453f00abb9a?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not truly
believe in this god he espouses!
End of story.
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in *another*
SIX THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zghp7o
http://tinyurl.com/76a8chm
http://tinyurl.com/6q3q498
http://tinyurl.com/6n2swsr
http://tinyurl.com/7rvtlyu
http://tinyurl.com/7x4m3fv
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
another* TEN THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zcuwsb
http://tinyurl.com/7t47anq
http://tinyurl.com/7wvegqc
http://tinyurl.com/6rg67wc
http://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fw
http://tinyurl.com/77bopo8
http://tinyurl.com/86zwhj6
http://tinyurl.com/7zlzxtd
http://tinyurl.com/7eknx73
http://tinyurl.com/6lgcwpq
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
BilliBoi Chicken Bill Ran:
http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu
Coward-For-Christ™ Calvin Ramsey Denying Christ Thrice:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
e789f4adad4e8fad?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5ddc9354493b62b3?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5cfb83a18dbc7442?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Codebreaker Ran:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/5868cad2d0302527/f756e4d43ab0ae9f?q=Where+is+the+Soul%3F
+group:alt.atheism+author:Budikka#f756e4d43ab0ae9f
Duck & Run Duke Ran:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/0cb3889ae3bd41dd
Duck & Run Duke Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/867lax4
http://tinyurl.com/7kawokn
http://tinyurl.com/3brposl
Flatnads Fasghnad RAN:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
thread/58c9df7a83bdd7e3?scoring=d&
IlNeverBeBauck IlBeBauck Ran:
http://tinyurl.com/3efeute
http://tinyurl.com/7ppk3mq
http://tinyurl.com/7trpdte
http://tinyurl.com/82fte2a
http://tinyurl.com/6n5pj4u
IlNeverBebauck denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
http://tinyurl.com/7od78wt
http://tinyurl.com/7abfajg
Joe Bruno Ran away:
http://tinyurl.com/8m38v5w
Patrick denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7l5hyw5
US4Lyin' US4ZION Ran
http://tinyurl.com/79f9oxx
US4ZION Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7oqwbqq
http://tinyurl.com/7rpq6ch
http://tinyurl.com/7pj5ut5
Old Man Joke Old Man Joe ran:
http://tinyurl.com/887lhzh
Zacharias Mulletstein Denies Christ Thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7a47jy8
Budikka
Devils Advocaat
Nov 9, 2012, 8:22:11 PM11/9/12
to
On 10 Nov, 01:04, Budikka666 <Budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> All Flee & Hide All-Seeing-| Ran:http://tinyurl.com/3zmbfkuhttp://tinyurl.com/6w3mbrrhttp://tinyurl.com/cp8de7yhttp://tinyurl.com/77tkgdk
>
> All-Seeing-| denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/836mqf8http://tinyurl.com/6lj584phttp://tinyurl.com/7pz5ljp
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wnhttp://tinyurl.com/74h455ehttp://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
>
> IlNeverBebauck denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7http://tinyurl.com/7od78wthttp://tinyurl.com/7abfajg
>
> US4ZION Denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7oqwbqqhttp://tinyurl.com/7rpq6chhttp://tinyurl.com/7pj5ut5
I disagree.
If it were pure bullshit.
It would be useful.
:)
> All Flee & Hide All-Seeing-| Ran:http://tinyurl.com/3zmbfkuhttp://tinyurl.com/6w3mbrrhttp://tinyurl.com/cp8de7yhttp://tinyurl.com/77tkgdk
>
> All-Seeing-| denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/836mqf8http://tinyurl.com/6lj584phttp://tinyurl.com/7pz5ljp
>
> BrailJOB the LiarBoi Loonbag DENYING Jesus THRICE, shrinking away like
> a limp Peter at the passion:http://tinyurl.com/6kck7b5http://tinyurl.com/7d2s93zhttp://tinyurl.com/6wyp6se
> BrailJOB the LiarBoi Loonbag DENYING Jesus THRICE, shrinking away like
>
> The above are included in the following examples of BrailJOB running in
> every single case when he was given ONE HUNDRED Opportunities to
> witness for his LORD:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/c69a90d07c0a4d79
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
> god:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> cbe97ddc53be5a00?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> The above are included in the following examples of BrailJOB running in
> every single case when he was given ONE HUNDRED Opportunities to
> witness for his LORD:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/c69a90d07c0a4d79
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
> god:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> thread/59b246e0c8e3e4f9?scoring=d&
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
> simultaneously:http://tinyurl.com/8cpp6ruhttps://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
> e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
> authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
> Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
> turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
> that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
> were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
> he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
> up on my debate offer.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/9rm86ajhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
> authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
> Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
> turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
> that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
> were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
> he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
> up on my debate offer.
>
> thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
> existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
> support his LIES by turning
> tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he
> has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
> omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
> would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me up
> on my debate offer.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/8o3wsmghttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
> existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
> support his LIES by turning
> tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he
> has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
> omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
> would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me up
> on my debate offer.
>
> ec1a84272b3493f1?scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the Noahic
> flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that
> he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank
> coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his
> worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god,
> and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god
> to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/9hpgy2vhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the Noahic
> flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that
> he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank
> coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his
> worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god,
> and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god
> to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> db798efe8d1d0c97?scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific evidence
> in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist Coward-For-
> Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES
> by turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
> proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If
> there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any
> faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have
> taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/986crjkhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific evidence
> in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist Coward-For-
> Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES
> by turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
> proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If
> there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any
> faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have
> taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
> latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
> admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running
> like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH
> in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator
> god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that
> god to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ckeaadmhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
> latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
> admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and running
> like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH
> in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator
> god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that
> god to support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
>
> c786b453f00abb9a?scoring=d&
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
> unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
> Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
> turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
> that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
> were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
> he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
> up on my debate offer.
> So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not truly
> believe in this god he espouses!
> End of story.
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in *another*
> SIX THREADS simultaneously:http://tinyurl.com/7zghp7ohttp://tinyurl.com/76a8chmhttp://tinyurl.com/6q3q498http://tinyurl.com/6n2swsrhttp://tinyurl.com/7rvtlyuhttp://tinyurl.com/7x4m3fv
> Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
> unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
> Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
> turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving
> that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there
> were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith,
> he would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
> up on my debate offer.
> So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not truly
> believe in this god he espouses!
> End of story.
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in *another*
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
> another* TEN THREADS simultaneously:http://tinyurl.com/7zcuwsbhttp://tinyurl.com/7t47anqhttp://tinyurl.com/7wvegqchttp://tinyurl.com/6rg67wchttp://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fwhttp://tinyurl.com/77bopo8http://tinyurl.com/86zwhj6http://tinyurl.com/7zlzxtdhttp://tinyurl.com/7eknx73http://tinyurl.com/6lgcwpq
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wnhttp://tinyurl.com/74h455ehttp://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=enhttps://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=enhttps://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
>
> BilliBoi Chicken Bill Ran:http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Calvin Ramsey Denying Christ Thrice:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e789f4adad4e8fad?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/5ddc9354493b62b3?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
>
> BilliBoi Chicken Bill Ran:http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Calvin Ramsey Denying Christ Thrice:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/
> e789f4adad4e8fad?scoring=d&http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/5cfb83a18dbc7442?scoring=d&
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Codebreaker Ran:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/5868cad2d0302527/f756e4d43ab0ae9f?q=Where+is+the+Soul%3F
> +group:alt.atheism+author:Budikka#f756e4d43ab0ae9f
>
> Duck & Run Duke Ran:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/0cb3889ae3bd41dd
>
> Duck & Run Duke Denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/867lax4http://tinyurl.com/7kawoknhttp://tinyurl.com/3brposl
>
> Coward-For-Christ™ Codebreaker Ran:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/5868cad2d0302527/f756e4d43ab0ae9f?q=Where+is+the+Soul%3F
> +group:alt.atheism+author:Budikka#f756e4d43ab0ae9f
>
> Duck & Run Duke Ran:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/0cb3889ae3bd41dd
>
>
> Flatnads Fasghnad RAN:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/58c9df7a83bdd7e3?scoring=d&
>
> IlNeverBeBauck IlBeBauck Ran:http://tinyurl.com/3efeutehttp://tinyurl.com/7ppk3mqhttp://tinyurl.com/7trpdtehttp://tinyurl.com/82fte2ahttp://tinyurl.com/6n5pj4u
> Flatnads Fasghnad RAN:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/
> thread/58c9df7a83bdd7e3?scoring=d&
>
>
> IlNeverBebauck denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7http://tinyurl.com/7od78wthttp://tinyurl.com/7abfajg
>
> Joe Bruno Ran away:http://tinyurl.com/8m38v5w
>
> Patrick denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7l5hyw5
>
> US4Lyin' US4ZION Ranhttp://tinyurl.com/79f9oxx
> Joe Bruno Ran away:http://tinyurl.com/8m38v5w
>
> Patrick denies Christ thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7l5hyw5
>
>
> US4ZION Denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7oqwbqqhttp://tinyurl.com/7rpq6chhttp://tinyurl.com/7pj5ut5
>
> Old Man Joke Old Man Joe ran:http://tinyurl.com/887lhzh
>
> Zacharias Mulletstein Denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7a47jy8
>
> Budikka
In response to your subject line change.
> Old Man Joke Old Man Joe ran:http://tinyurl.com/887lhzh
>
> Zacharias Mulletstein Denies Christ Thrice:http://tinyurl.com/7a47jy8
>
> Budikka
I disagree.
If it were pure bullshit.
It would be useful.
:)
Ralph
Nov 9, 2012, 8:33:57 PM11/9/12
to
On 11/9/2012 1:20 PM, Andrew wrote:
see that there is still questionable DNA.
Ralph
Nov 9, 2012, 8:34:53 PM11/9/12
to
On 11/9/2012 2:06 PM, Andrew wrote:
Smiler
Nov 9, 2012, 8:53:03 PM11/9/12
to
On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 10:20:50 -0800, Andrew wrote:
> "Smiler" wrote in message
> news:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
>> Andrew wrote:
>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>>
>>>> Junk DNA:
>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
>>>> with no discernible function."
>>>
>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>
>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>
>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He
>>> created the DNA for all living things..after all.
>>
>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>
> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
No mention of any creator there. Try again.
> "Smiler" wrote in message
> news:pan.2012.11.08....@JoeKing.com...
>> Andrew wrote:
>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>>
>>>> Junk DNA:
>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be useless junk
>>>> with no discernible function."
>>>
>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>
>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>
>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He
>>> created the DNA for all living things..after all.
>>
>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>
> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>
>> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>
> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about the supposedly
> junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He
> created the DNA required for life in all things, plant or animal.
>
> Worship Him!
Nope. I don't worship figments of your imagination, because I'm sane.
Andrew
Nov 9, 2012, 9:26:59 PM11/9/12
to
No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
Devils Advocaat
Nov 10, 2012, 12:52:27 AM11/10/12
to
On 10 Nov, 02:25, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
What observable, physical, verifiable evidence do you have to support
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
your claim?
SkyEyes
Nov 10, 2012, 2:49:27 AM11/10/12
to
On Nov 9, 7:25 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
Actually: (This was posted originally by jillery over on T.O.):
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
For those interested in something different than an IDist doing his
usual dodging and weaving, here are some links that I think are
interesting:
<http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/origins-of-life-%E2%80%93-
ami...>
This explains that the DNA code found on Earth didn't need to appear
all-at-once, but evolved stepwise from an initial start of a few of
the most common and thermally stable amino acids into the code we
observe today.
The above contains links to a previous article:
<http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/origins-of-life-%e2%80%93-
wha...>
This shows how amino acids and nucleic acids can self-assemble into a
simple 5-nucleotide tRNA strand.
<http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/origin-of-life-rna-self-
repli...>
This describes how RNA can self-replicate outside of a cell.
The above contains links to previous articles:
<http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/05/origins-of-life-can-rna-
spont...>
This describes how RNA can self-assemble outside of a cell.
<http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/origins-of-life-darwins-
littl...>
This desccribes how nucleotides self-assemble into 100-base RNA
strands outside of a cell.
<http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/06/13/the-origin-of-life-on-
ea...>
This describes how phospholipids and fatty acids self-assemble into
cell-like bubbles with pores large enough to pass macromolecules.
<http://wavefunction.fieldofscience.com/2010/12/new-place-new-view-
slo...>
This explains that increased temperature increases reactivity of some
pre-biotic chemistry far more than expected, increasing the likelihood
of abiogenesis.
AOTA are from the following Scienceblog:
<http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/07/30/we-can-know-nothing-
abou...>
which has many other links, most of which are paywalled.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2442388/pdf/
rstb20061881.pdf
This describes some of the abiotic chemical precursors found around
alkaline hydrothermal vents, a possible location for abiogenesis.
Happy reading.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Seth lePod
Nov 10, 2012, 3:03:15 AM11/10/12
to
You really really want this book
http://www.amazon.com/Life-Ascending-Great-Inventions-Evolution/dp/0393338665/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1352534496&sr=8-1&keywords=nick+lane
Seth
Seth lePod
Nov 10, 2012, 3:06:43 AM11/10/12
to
On Nov 10, 12:49 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
of this as "fantasy".
Three to one that he doesn't read any of it.
Eight to one that Andrew does not dismiss
Balaam's ass as "fantasy"
Seth
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 4:45:33 AM11/10/12
to
"Seth lePod" wrote in message news:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Yes, or shall we say.. pseudo metaphysical fantasy
decked out in scientific garb to deceive the masses.
decked out in scientific garb to deceive the masses.
Seth lePod
Nov 10, 2012, 5:32:26 AM11/10/12
to
On Nov 10, 2:43 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Wow! That was one hell of a lot of material there,
Andrew. I'm pretty much familiar with most of the
basics, and it still would have taken me quite some
time to digest it all.
So, what's your secret? How did you manage
not just to read through all that, but to find the
flaws in each and every writeup?
Really, I'm serious: do enlighten us with
your insights. Let's just take, say the first four
essays, and you can critique each for us
Deal?
Good! Go:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Seth
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Andrew. I'm pretty much familiar with most of the
basics, and it still would have taken me quite some
time to digest it all.
So, what's your secret? How did you manage
not just to read through all that, but to find the
flaws in each and every writeup?
Really, I'm serious: do enlighten us with
your insights. Let's just take, say the first four
essays, and you can critique each for us
Deal?
Good! Go:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Seth
Devils Advocaat
Nov 10, 2012, 5:33:11 AM11/10/12
to
On 10 Nov, 09:43, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
So when proper facts are examined, and a valid hypothesis put forward
and tested to the point it becomes a theory and that's repeatedly
tested and withstands that testing, and it goes against your beliefs,
you'll reject it out of hand. In my opinion that is utter foolishness.
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
and tested to the point it becomes a theory and that's repeatedly
tested and withstands that testing, and it goes against your beliefs,
you'll reject it out of hand. In my opinion that is utter foolishness.
Budikka
Nov 10, 2012, 9:04:36 AM11/10/12
to
On Nov 9, 8:25 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
Why, because lying scum like you says so? You dishonestly change the
> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
title of the message to "proving" and then RUN every single time
you're asked for this so-called proof! lol!
You yourself have DENIED CHRIST THRICE:
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
That's how hypocritical you are.
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
Once again, heartfelt thanks for helping me show everyone how
thoroughly dishonest creationism is. Scum like you make my job ten
tiems easier. Oh, and congrats on dragging so many atheists along
with you into your fraudulent subject change. Sometimes atheists are
more like sheep than Christians, aren't they? But that won't help
you, because people are smarter than you can ever credit them, and
they can see your dishonesty and cowardice. The more you indulge
yourself in it like the religiously spoiled brat you are, the mroe
they will reject your position.
And no amount of creationist fraud and dishonesty will ever prevent me
from hammering creationism into its grave. I post the facts and show
how they support evolution. All you do is stick you fingers in yoru
ears and chant "no it isn't" and run like diarrhea every time you're
asked to do the same as I do so regularly.
How well do you suppose that your cowardly tactics will work?
Seriously? How many people do you expect to win to your cause when
everyone can see that your supposedly omnipotent god offers no spine
to you? He can't save you from your cowardice any more than he can
save you form your delusions. How many people will want to follow
someone who they see is manifestly dishonest to the core and who has
ZERO FAITH in the very god he's suppsoedly championing?
Keep up the good work Android.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
Budikka
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
Seth lePod
Nov 10, 2012, 11:54:48 AM11/10/12
to
On Nov 10, 2:43 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
Oh, and while you're working away on your
critiques of those first four links, let me ask you
a quickie: motivation. What so motivates people
that they can spend years of their lives and tens
of thousands of dollars getting a degree in biology,
then endless hours in the lab, followed by writing
and re-writing and re-writing papers...just so they
can get their chance to "deceive the masses"?
Seriously, is that what you think drives biologists?
If so, why?
(you might want to consider Coleridge's famous
evaluation of Shakespeare's Iago before replying.
It's perfectly germane)
Seth
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:707996f2-1d29-4a62...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com...
critiques of those first four links, let me ask you
a quickie: motivation. What so motivates people
that they can spend years of their lives and tens
of thousands of dollars getting a degree in biology,
then endless hours in the lab, followed by writing
and re-writing and re-writing papers...just so they
can get their chance to "deceive the masses"?
Seriously, is that what you think drives biologists?
If so, why?
(you might want to consider Coleridge's famous
evaluation of Shakespeare's Iago before replying.
It's perfectly germane)
Seth
Ralph
Nov 10, 2012, 12:16:00 PM11/10/12
to
On 11/9/2012 9:26 PM, Andrew wrote:
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>
>
>
Unsupported assertion.
> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>
>
>
Ken
Nov 10, 2012, 12:28:37 PM11/10/12
to
Yes, or shall we say.. pseudo metaphysical fantasy decked out in
religious garb to deceive the gullible masses.
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 3:54:28 PM11/10/12
to
"Seth lePod" wrote in message news:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
> "Andrew" wrote:
>> "Seth lePod" wrote:
>> > SkyEyes wrote:
Here are some points to keep in mind:
1. Evidence shows that the earth never had a reducing atmosphere.
2. Amino acids will not link to form a biological protein, apart from
the mechanism to do so which is in cells that are *already* alive.
3. RNA is not synthesized ~except~ in cells that are *already* alive.
And, the nucleotides (of which RNA is made) require for -their-
synthesis the mechanism to do so that is in ~living~ cells.
Now, in light of the above, please point out any one of Brenda's
links above, that you think is not dependent on fantasy, contrary
to these established scientific facts.
Thank you.
Andrew
> "Andrew" wrote:
>> "Seth lePod" wrote:
>> > SkyEyes wrote:
1. Evidence shows that the earth never had a reducing atmosphere.
2. Amino acids will not link to form a biological protein, apart from
the mechanism to do so which is in cells that are *already* alive.
3. RNA is not synthesized ~except~ in cells that are *already* alive.
And, the nucleotides (of which RNA is made) require for -their-
synthesis the mechanism to do so that is in ~living~ cells.
Now, in light of the above, please point out any one of Brenda's
links above, that you think is not dependent on fantasy, contrary
to these established scientific facts.
Thank you.
Andrew
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 4:03:16 PM11/10/12
to
"Budikka" wrote in message news:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
of a Creator.
I hope this helps to answers your question.
Thank you.
Andrew
> "Andrew" wrote:
>> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
>Why..?
>> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
of a Creator.
I hope this helps to answers your question.
Thank you.
Andrew
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 4:06:16 PM11/10/12
to
"Ralph" wrote in message news:rsmdncO_jv5LFgPN...@giganews.com...
No.
> Andrew wrote:
>
>> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>>
> Unsupported assertion.
Can you have a code without a code maker?
>
>> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>>
> Unsupported assertion.
No.
Devils Advocaat
Nov 10, 2012, 4:06:49 PM11/10/12
to
On 10 Nov, 21:04, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Ralph" wrote in messagenews:rsmdncO_jv5LFgPN...@giganews.com...
> "Ralph" wrote in messagenews:rsmdncO_jv5LFgPN...@giganews.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
>
> >> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>
> > Unsupported assertion.
>
> Can you have a code without a code maker?
>
> No.
Still you fail to understand information theory.
>
> >> No DNA without a creation by a Creator.
>
> > Unsupported assertion.
>
> Can you have a code without a code maker?
>
> No.
Devils Advocaat
Nov 10, 2012, 4:08:47 PM11/10/12
to
On 10 Nov, 20:52, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
Still you fail to understand science.
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
The Magpie
Nov 10, 2012, 5:07:53 PM11/10/12
to
On 10/11/2012 21:03, Andrew wrote:
> "Budikka" wrote in message
> news:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>
>
"Andrew" wrote:
>
>>> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
>
>> Why..?
>
> DNA has a system of symbols
>
No it doesn't.
> "Budikka" wrote in message
> news:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>
>
"Andrew" wrote:
>
>>> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
>
>> Why..?
>
> DNA has a system of symbols
>
>
> that are used by an encoding and decoding mechanism
>
No they are not.
> that are used by an encoding and decoding mechanism
>
>
> that transmits instructions
>
No it does not.
>
> for assembling a complete organism.
>
No it does not.
> for assembling a complete organism.
>
>
> These instructions are independent of the communication medium
>
What there are (not instructions) are completely *dependent* on the
> These instructions are independent of the communication medium
>
communication medium.
>
> itself, therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a
> purposeful creation and therefore of a Creator.
>
Since you are wrong in every claim, you are wrong in this conclusion.
> itself, therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a
> purposeful creation and therefore of a Creator.
>
Christopher A. Lee
Nov 10, 2012, 5:16:11 PM11/10/12
to
Jeanne Douglas
Nov 10, 2012, 5:52:02 PM11/10/12
to
In article <0N-dnf5PW_c6XQPN...@earthlink.com>,
Of course, that load of twaddle answers nothing.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Adam
Nov 10, 2012, 6:04:59 PM11/10/12
to
On 2012-11-10 05:52 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:> In article
Good response, Andrew. From what the Lord said to us about them, I
suspected as much when I would watch the first animals being born.
suspected as much when I would watch the first animals being born.
Christopher A. Lee
Nov 10, 2012, 6:16:33 PM11/10/12
to
Adam
Nov 10, 2012, 6:25:35 PM11/10/12
to
On 2012-11-10 06:16 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012
Christopher of course is the result of DNA splicing with people, animals
and a tomato. That's why he acts the way that he does.
Adam & Eve
and a tomato. That's why he acts the way that he does.
Adam & Eve
Christopher A. Lee
Nov 10, 2012, 6:27:35 PM11/10/12
to
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:25:35 -0500, Adam
How is treating a fucking moron as a fucking moron for posting such
mind-boggling stupidity, evidence for that, imbecile?
>Adam & Eve
mind-boggling stupidity, evidence for that, imbecile?
>Adam & Eve
Jesus
Nov 10, 2012, 6:36:34 PM11/10/12
to
Christopher A. Lee
Nov 10, 2012, 6:45:07 PM11/10/12
to
Keep you creationist insanity to yourselves and nobody will know what
fucking morons you are.
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 7:44:02 PM11/10/12
to
"Ralph" wrote in message news:BtadnYWo1-2XMgDN...@giganews.com...
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Smiler" wrote:
>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>>>
>>>>> Junk DNA:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be
>>>>> useless junk with no discernible function."
>>>>
>>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>>
>>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>>
>>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
>>>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>>>
>>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>>
>> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>>> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>>
>> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about
>> the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
>> did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
>> for life in all things, plant or animal.
>
> Do you ever read what you post?? Read the.. article and
> you will see that there is still questionable DNA.
Yes, there are still some things you don't understand.
But there is enough to know that DNA is evidence of
a creation by a Creator. That is the important thing to
understand, Ralph.
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Smiler" wrote:
>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>>>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/decipher-dna/
>>>>>
>>>>> Junk DNA:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Protein-coding genes make up just 1.5 percent of our
>>>>> genome. The rest includes a lot of what is thought to be
>>>>> useless junk with no discernible function."
>>>>
>>>> No, the so called "Junk DNA" has *now been decoded*.
>>>> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>>
>>>> "They have determined that junk DNA is actually used to regulate gene
>>>> expression. Or, junk DNA is really on-off switches for protein encoding
>>>> DNA. ENCODE project results were published by Nature, Scientific
>>>> American, New York Times and others." http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>>>
>>>> So the truth is out, that our Creator did not make "junk" when He created
>>>> the DNA for all living things..after all.
>>>
>>> Your evidence for this is, what, exactly?
>>
>> Here --> http://www.p2l.it/1fs
>>
>>> Beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>>
>> If you want the truth, then renounce the falsehood about
>> the supposedly junk DNA. The truth is, that our Creator
>> did not make "junk" when He created the DNA required
>> for life in all things, plant or animal.
>
> Do you ever read what you post?? Read the.. article and
> you will see that there is still questionable DNA.
Yes, there are still some things you don't understand.
But there is enough to know that DNA is evidence of
a creation by a Creator. That is the important thing to
understand, Ralph.
Andrew
Nov 10, 2012, 7:45:03 PM11/10/12
to
"The Magpie" wrote in message news:_eAns.250334$A%.215110@fx26.am4...
You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
Devils Advocaat
Nov 10, 2012, 8:00:59 PM11/10/12
to
On 10 Nov, 21:01, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Budikka" wrote in messagenews:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
These instructions are independent of the
> communication medium itself,
But if you take away the DNA the information is no longer there.
How then is the information independent of the medium?
> therefore the DNA molecule is
> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
> of a Creator.
Your conclusion is in error.
> "Budikka" wrote in messagenews:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> > "Andrew" wrote:
> >> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
> >Why..?
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
> a complete organism.
Would you care to identify these alleged symbols?
> >> No DNA without acreationby a Creator.
> >Why..?
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
> a complete organism.
These instructions are independent of the
> communication medium itself,
How then is the information independent of the medium?
> therefore the DNA molecule is
> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
> of a Creator.
Jeanne Douglas
Nov 10, 2012, 8:58:09 PM11/10/12
to
In article <2pCdnS3BmtcDaQPN...@earthlink.com>,
BWAHAHAHA!!!
And what, precisely, are your qualification to authoritatively speak
about genetics?
And what, precisely, are your qualification to authoritatively speak
about genetics?
Ralph
Nov 10, 2012, 10:30:52 PM11/10/12
to
your problem.
There are fence posts with more intellect than you have.
SkyEyes
Nov 11, 2012, 2:23:20 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 1:03 am, Seth lePod <v.inferna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 12:49 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 9, 7:25 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 12:49 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 9, 7:25 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
>
>
> You really really want this book
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Life-Ascending-Great-Inventions-Evolution/dp/03...
I'll put it in this year's letter to Santa, on my list of Highly
Desired Goodies.
SkyEyes
Nov 11, 2012, 2:26:08 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 1:52 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
*What* evidence shows this? Please explain in as much detail as you
can.
doesn't happen, it *does*. READ THE PAPERS.
> And, the nucleotides (of which RNA is made) require for -their-
> synthesis the mechanism to do so that is in ~living~ cells.
Cite, please?
And answer Seth's question upthread.
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
can.
>
> 2. Amino acids will not link to form a biological protein, apart from
> the mechanism to do so which is in cells that are *already* alive.
Cite, please?
> 2. Amino acids will not link to form a biological protein, apart from
> the mechanism to do so which is in cells that are *already* alive.
>
> 3. RNA is not synthesized ~except~ in cells that are *already* alive.
But that's what one of the papers documented. You can't say it
> 3. RNA is not synthesized ~except~ in cells that are *already* alive.
doesn't happen, it *does*. READ THE PAPERS.
> And, the nucleotides (of which RNA is made) require for -their-
> synthesis the mechanism to do so that is in ~living~ cells.
>
> Now, in light of the above, please point out any one of Brenda's
> links above, that you think is not dependent on fantasy, contrary
> to these established scientific facts.
No. *You* back up your assertions with peer-reviewed papers first.
> Now, in light of the above, please point out any one of Brenda's
> links above, that you think is not dependent on fantasy, contrary
> to these established scientific facts.
And answer Seth's question upthread.
SkyEyes
Nov 11, 2012, 2:29:44 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 5:43 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "The Magpie" wrote in messagenews:_eAns.250334$A%.215110@fx26.am4...
<Splort>
Oh, wow. Not only did I ruin my keyboard, my irony meter exploded and
scared the kitteh (the *deaf* kitteh, which takes some doin').
You really *must* warn us when you intend to come out with those
boners, Andrew. Give a gal a chance to swallow her diet ginger ale,
at the very least.
> "The Magpie" wrote in messagenews:_eAns.250334$A%.215110@fx26.am4...
Oh, wow. Not only did I ruin my keyboard, my irony meter exploded and
scared the kitteh (the *deaf* kitteh, which takes some doin').
You really *must* warn us when you intend to come out with those
boners, Andrew. Give a gal a chance to swallow her diet ginger ale,
at the very least.
SkyEyes
Nov 11, 2012, 2:31:17 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 4:36 pm, Jesus <Je...@Christ.org> wrote:
> On 2012-11-10 06:27 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:25:35 -0500, Adam
> > <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
>
> >> On 2012-11-10 06:16 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012
> >> 18:04:59 -0500, Adam
> On 2012-11-10 06:27 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:25:35 -0500, Adam
> > <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
>
> >> On 2012-11-10 06:16 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012
> >> 18:04:59 -0500, Adam
> >>> <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
>
> >>>> On 2012-11-10 05:52 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:> In article
> >>>> <0N-dnf5PW_c6XQPNnZ2dnUVZ_uOdn...@earthlink.com>,
>
> >>>> On 2012-11-10 05:52 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:> In article
> >>>>> "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Of course, that load of twaddle answers nothing.
>
> >>>> Good response, Andrew. From what the Lord said to us about them, I
> >>>> suspected as much when I would watch the first animals being born.
>
> >>> What a fucking moron.
>
> >> Christopher of course is the result of DNA splicing with people, animals
> >> and a tomato. That's why he acts the way that he does.
>
> > How is treating a fucking moron as a fucking moron for posting such
> > mind-boggling stupidity, evidence for that, imbecile?
>
> >> Adam & Eve
>
> Watch the language, Christopher. We're Christians here.
*You* may be, but we're fucking well *not*. Gird up your loins and
>
> >>>>> Of course, that load of twaddle answers nothing.
>
> >>>> Good response, Andrew. From what the Lord said to us about them, I
> >>>> suspected as much when I would watch the first animals being born.
>
> >>> What a fucking moron.
>
> >> Christopher of course is the result of DNA splicing with people, animals
> >> and a tomato. That's why he acts the way that he does.
>
> > How is treating a fucking moron as a fucking moron for posting such
> > mind-boggling stupidity, evidence for that, imbecile?
>
> >> Adam & Eve
>
> Watch the language, Christopher. We're Christians here.
learn to live with it. Cussing never killed anybody.
SkyEyes
Nov 11, 2012, 2:33:14 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 8:30 pm, Ralph <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 7:44 PM, Andrew wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Ralph" wrote in messagenews:BtadnYWo1-2XMgDN...@giganews.com...
> On 11/10/2012 7:44 PM, Andrew wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Andrew wrote:
> >>> "Smiler" wrote:
> >>>> Andrew wrote:
> >>>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
> >>>>>>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/11/06/deciphe...
> >>> "Smiler" wrote:
> >>>> Andrew wrote:
> >>>>> "Budikka666" wrote:
have decorative *rocks* in my front yard that are smarter than Andrew.
Don Martin
Nov 11, 2012, 9:57:00 AM11/11/12
to
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:36:34 -0500, Jesus <Je...@Christ.org> wrote:
yourselves with an entrenching tool (you cheap bastards may share one
if you like).
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
Seth lePod
Nov 11, 2012, 10:15:18 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 1:52 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Seth lePod" wrote in messagenews:bebe61bb-ca33-446f...@y5g2000pbi.googlegroups.com...
No, I did not. What I DID and AM demanding of you
for are specific criticisms of specific articles.
Pick an article. Get busy.
Oh, and just for your edification:
1) if you're still hung up on Miller's experiments,
get over it. No one is postulating a reducing
atmosphere these days -- and more importantly,
few are even thinking about life having arisen
on the surface.
2) who says that proteins were a component
of the first blobs that could be called "life"?
No researcher in this fieldl that I know of.
3) nucleotides have been found on asteroids.
Are you claiming that there is life in open space?
Now pick one and start getting specific.
Seth
Oh and by the way?
"Nucleotide phosphorylation and RNA oligomerization
take place in water in non-enzymatic abiotic conditions."
-JDS book of abstracts for 2011
Budikka666
Nov 11, 2012, 10:33:11 AM11/11/12
to
On Nov 10, 6:43 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials, yet who demands
> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
that we accept his lies, and then turns around and RUNS every time
*we* demand he supports them? lol!
Thanks for showing everyone on Usenet what a coward, a liar, and a
vacuous hypocrite for Christ you are.
You're way better than I am at discrediting your brain-dead beliefs.
Andrew-a-Blank's shameful record of denying Christ follows.
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
god:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/cbe97ddc53be5a00?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/59b246e0c8e3e4f9?scoring=d&
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/8cpp6ru
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god.
If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had*
any faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would
have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9rm86aj
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning
tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that
he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were
an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/8o3wsmg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/ec1a84272b3493f1?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
Noahic flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and
running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has
ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/9hpgy2v
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/db798efe8d1d0c97?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific
evidence in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank coward that
he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and
fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this
loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god to
support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/986crjk
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and
running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has
ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.
http://tinyurl.com/ckeaadm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/c786b453f00abb9a?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god.
If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had*
any faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would
have taken me up on my debate offer.
So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not
truly believe in this god he espouses!
End of story.
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in
*another* SIX THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zghp7o
http://tinyurl.com/76a8chm
http://tinyurl.com/6q3q498
http://tinyurl.com/6n2swsr
http://tinyurl.com/7rvtlyu
http://tinyurl.com/7x4m3fv
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
another* TEN THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zcuwsb
http://tinyurl.com/7t47anq
http://tinyurl.com/7wvegqc
http://tinyurl.com/6rg67wc
http://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fw
http://tinyurl.com/77bopo8
http://tinyurl.com/86zwhj6
http://tinyurl.com/7zlzxtd
http://tinyurl.com/7eknx73
http://tinyurl.com/6lgcwpq
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&
Budikka
Caranx latus
Nov 11, 2012, 12:49:03 PM11/11/12
to
Budikka666
Nov 11, 2012, 2:06:11 PM11/11/12
to
On Nov 11, 11:46 am, Caranx latus <aug.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed. They know better than to construct arguments conclusion-first.
Evdiently not!
> Indeed. They know better than to construct arguments conclusion-first.
Budikka
Andrew
Nov 11, 2012, 5:41:33 PM11/11/12
to
"Budikka666" wrote in message news:859ed637-095e-499b...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
Thank you.
Andrew
Jesus loves you sooooo much!
> "Andrew" wrote:
>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
> yet who demands that we accept his lies..
>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
of a Creator.
I hope this helps to answers your previous question.
of a Creator.
Thank you.
Andrew
Jesus loves you sooooo much!
Devils Advocaat
Nov 11, 2012, 6:40:09 PM11/11/12
to
On Nov 11, 10:39 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Budikka666" wrote in messagenews:859ed637-095e-499b...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
How can information be independent of the medium that carries it?
Have you forgotten so soon?
I proved this claim of yours to be wrong.
With nothing but a simple scenario.
One copy of a book.
No one read it.
The author forgot its content.
The book was destroyed.
Where's its content?
You admitted.
"Gone".
> "Budikka666" wrote in messagenews:859ed637-095e-499b...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
> > "Andrew" wrote:
> >> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
> > This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
> > yet who demands that we accept his lies..
>
> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
> a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
> communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
> of a Creator.
Poor Andrew.
> >> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
> > This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
> > yet who demands that we accept his lies..
>
> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
> a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
> communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
> of a Creator.
How can information be independent of the medium that carries it?
Have you forgotten so soon?
I proved this claim of yours to be wrong.
With nothing but a simple scenario.
One copy of a book.
No one read it.
The author forgot its content.
The book was destroyed.
Where's its content?
You admitted.
"Gone".
Smiler
Nov 11, 2012, 7:17:36 PM11/11/12
to
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 14:41:33 -0800, Andrew wrote:
> "Budikka666" wrote in message
> news:859ed637-095e-499b...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>
>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials, yet who demands
>> that we accept his lies..
>
> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and decoding
> mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling a complete organism.
> These instructions are independent of the communication medium itself,
> therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a purposeful
> creation and therefore of a Creator.
>
Repeating your lies doesn't make them any truer, Andrew.
> "Budikka666" wrote in message
> news:859ed637-095e-499b...@4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>
>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials, yet who demands
>> that we accept his lies..
>
> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>
> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and decoding
> mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling a complete organism.
> These instructions are independent of the communication medium itself,
> therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a purposeful
> creation and therefore of a Creator.
>
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Ralph
Nov 11, 2012, 8:04:03 PM11/11/12
to
Andrew
Nov 11, 2012, 9:55:56 PM11/11/12
to
"Smiler" wrote in message news:pan.2012.11.12....@JoeKing.com...
> Andrew wrote:
talk about it.
Evidence is in.
There -is- a Creator.
GOD
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>>
>>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials, yet who demands
>>> that we accept his lies..
>>
>> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>>
>> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and decoding
>> mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling a complete organism.
>> These instructions are independent of the communication medium itself,
>> therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a purposeful
>> creation and therefore of a Creator.
>>
>
> Repeating your lies doesn't make them any truer, Andrew.
If what I wrote were not true, you would not be here to
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>>
>>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials, yet who demands
>>> that we accept his lies..
>>
>> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>>
>> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and decoding
>> mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling a complete organism.
>> These instructions are independent of the communication medium itself,
>> therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a purposeful
>> creation and therefore of a Creator.
>>
>
> Repeating your lies doesn't make them any truer, Andrew.
talk about it.
Evidence is in.
There -is- a Creator.
GOD
Andrew
Nov 11, 2012, 9:56:19 PM11/11/12
to
"Ralph" wrote in message news:0pmdndT3naKX1j3N...@giganews.com...
> Andrew wrote:
for evermore, Amen, and have the keys of hell and of death."
~ Jesus
Revelation 1:18
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Budikka666" wrote:
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
>>> yet who demands that we accept his lies..
>> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>>
>> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
>> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
>> a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
>> communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
>> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
>> of a Creator.
>>
>> I hope this helps to answers your previous question.
>>
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>>> This from the worthless scum who has ZERO credentials,
>>> yet who demands that we accept his lies..
>> No, simply accept the truth. What I posted (below) was truth...
>>
>> DNA has a system of symbols that are used by an encoding and
>> decoding mechanism that transmits instructions for assembling
>> a complete organism. These instructions are independent of the
>> communication medium itself, therefore the DNA molecule is
>> solid positive evidence of a purposeful creation and therefore
>> of a Creator.
>>
>> I hope this helps to answers your previous question.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> Jesus loves you sooooo much!
>>
> Considering Jesus has been dead for sooooo long, that
> would be quite a feat.
"I am He that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive
>>
>> Jesus loves you sooooo much!
>>
> Considering Jesus has been dead for sooooo long, that
> would be quite a feat.
for evermore, Amen, and have the keys of hell and of death."
~ Jesus
Revelation 1:18
Devils Advocaat
Nov 11, 2012, 10:45:09 PM11/11/12
to
On Nov 12, 2:54 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Smiler" wrote in messagenews:pan.2012.11.12....@JoeKing.com...
It isn't true.
> "Smiler" wrote in messagenews:pan.2012.11.12....@JoeKing.com...
The Magpie
Nov 12, 2012, 9:30:47 AM11/12/12
to
On 11/11/2012 00:45, Andrew wrote:
> "The Magpie" wrote in message news:_eAns.250334$A%.215110@fx26.am4...
>> On 10/11/2012 21:03, Andrew wrote:
>>> "Budikka" wrote in message
>>> news:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>>
> "The Magpie" wrote in message news:_eAns.250334$A%.215110@fx26.am4...
>> On 10/11/2012 21:03, Andrew wrote:
>>> "Budikka" wrote in message
>>> news:574ac7fd-9515-4450...@q16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> DNA has a system of symbols
>>>
>> No it doesn't.
>>>
>>> that are used by an encoding and decoding mechanism
>>>
>> No they are not.
>>>
>>> that transmits instructions
>>>
>> No it does not.
>>>
>>> for assembling a complete organism.
>>>
>> No it does not.
>>>
>>> These instructions are independent of the communication medium
>>>
>> What there are (not instructions) are completely *dependent* on the
>> communication medium.
>>>
>>> itself, therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a
>>> purposeful creation and therefore of a Creator.
>>>
>> Since you are wrong in every claim, you are wrong in this conclusion.
>
> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
So says the ignorant.... to the highly qualified geneticist!
>>>
>> No it doesn't.
>>>
>>> that are used by an encoding and decoding mechanism
>>>
>> No they are not.
>>>
>>> that transmits instructions
>>>
>> No it does not.
>>>
>>> for assembling a complete organism.
>>>
>> No it does not.
>>>
>>> These instructions are independent of the communication medium
>>>
>> What there are (not instructions) are completely *dependent* on the
>> communication medium.
>>>
>>> itself, therefore the DNA molecule is solid positive evidence of a
>>> purposeful creation and therefore of a Creator.
>>>
>> Since you are wrong in every claim, you are wrong in this conclusion.
>
> You are obviously waaaay outside of your field.
>
Ralph
Nov 12, 2012, 5:06:34 PM11/12/12
to
right.... he never wrote anything.
0 new messages