im thinking we kind of created DNA if u think about it because someone must have discovered it if u get what im saying....
DNA has always been there, so God created it. Yeah I'm sure some scientist discovered it, but that doesn't mean he created it.
Greetings again pavlakos, Yes, the fiction deity of an early-bronze age agricultural society and their superstitious astrologically-based neo-pagan beliefs is the reason for Deoxyribonucleic Acid. You're a funny guy. Anyway, Deoxyribonucleic Acid is a nucleic acid composed of nucleotides, molecules which form under natural circumstances. DNA is used in organic life to store information, mostly relevant to protein synthesis. The field of biology is currently working on synthesizing DNA or alternatively, finding life on nearby astronomical bodies which have no relation to our biosphere. The complexity of the information in DNA can simply be explained my evolution. Yours Truly, Sam_Spade
now have you ever wondered if the deities the ancients believed in were not just fictional gods, but rather extra terrestrial, or even extra dimensional beings who came to earth? obviously theres really no proof to validate this outlandish claim, and i dont honestly expect many people to believe it, its just my two cents and personal conclusions.
thats no different than saying how did the trees get here? how did the sun get here? how is everything just right to sustain life? because god planned it that way simple as that.
Just because we discovered it doesn't mean we created it. Why didn't I think of this? I mean it's so simple and easy, god just did it! If so, why didn't god give us immunity to aids and other deadly diseases? Or why did he create those disease in the first place?! God obviously created us to be affected by aids. And then he had to have created aids (since god does everything). Can you please tell me why god is doing this to us? And if you say god works in mysterious ways I'll slap the shit out of you. That's the oldest and lamest excuse to believe in god.
Greetings agains, pavlakos, I'm glad you realize there is no evidence to substantiate that. and Yes I have considered it. I read that book by Erich von Dankien back in the early 90's when it was still new and has a great hearty laugh over it all. Oblivion2123, I'm unsure if you were just playing devil's advocate and are attempting to make a mocking blow at theism, or if you're sincere. Either way, your response is a problem, most notably because it is not remotely scientific and is based upon several logical fallacies. Ultimately it's a gigantic appeal to authority, vindicated by used of appeal to ignorance, emotion and a couple false premises. Yours Truly, Sam_Spade
I find the theory of the Annunaki very fascinating. I'll continue to research it. Until I find anything definitive, however, I'm convinced only natural evolution can be our creator. You have to admit, mr Spade, that it's not the worst explanation of human origins you've heard. I can see an alien race breeding a primitive species for manual labor, a possible explanation for the abundance of sky-god worship that haunts human history. Maybe I haven't heard enough counter-arguments. What would you point out as the main inconsistencies you find in this theory?
Greetings, Well I find it highly preposterous, and I'll show you why. First, lets examine the archaeological, palaeological and anthropological evidence we have to support this Annunaki "theory" (Note: I say theory in the common definition, not the term scientific theory). We have carved tablets, painted murals and... well that's about it. It's a creation myth, documented by highly superstitious agricultural pagans. Most religious sects, albeit Christianity, Paganism, Judaisms, Islam will document their beliefs as truth; we cannot accept these things as historically accurate based on that. Secondly, from a biological standpoint, this is all very..... overbearing. There is no reason to think that the human genetic structure was tampered with some 200,000 years ago. None. Proposing that we are somehow a genetically engineered labour force is even more absurd. Do you know how pitifully weak the human body is? Do you know how many severe flaws our bodies have? Moreso, why give your labour force precision dexterity and an unwieldy and destructive psychology prone to personal interest? It defies all logic. Then you go on to say At first I thought you were joking here. Astrological Polytheism has such a distinct trend in human history, because of how humanity interacts with the night sky. The night sky has the ability to be a functional calendar, mapping system and the apparent source of energy and light. It's no wonder why humans worshiped the sky; it was something tangible and something that physically produced. As humans usually do with things they like, they anthropomorphised it and made allegories and stories. You can seek this same thing repeated even with Greek and Roman mythologies and later on Abrahamic mythologies. Anyways, I've said my peice. Yours Truly, Sam_Spade
Some good reading on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Cosmic-Serpent-Jeremy-Narby/dp/0874779642 http://deoxy.org/narbystew.htm http://deoxy.org/meme/CosmicSerpent
Sounds similar to those who rationalize the unexplainable with the God hypothesis. Darwinism is bordering on being a faith based religion. There is irrefutable evidence to support evolution and natural selection to a certain extent, but attributing evolution to all phenomena we cannot explain is not very scientific. You cannot "simply" explain the process of evolution arising through such irreducible complexities as DNA and the flagella motor. The amount of information pre-coded and later stored in DNA is pretty remarkable. I would like your simple evolutionary explanation as to how DNA came about through natural process.
Greetings aaronman, I'm not attempting to rationalize the "unexplainable" though, I'm referring to emergent complexity Yet the very next thing you say is... Fantastic contradiction. I'm not... you make it seem like there is an arbitrary connection here. DNA is the deciding factor OF biological evolution You're behind the times, Dover trial is over. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200_1.html "pre-coded"? What do you mean? Again, DNA synthesis is something that is not fully understood, but we do know some important facts. Firstly, we know that two of the very primary components of DNA synthesis and self-replicating proteins can occur in a very large window of opportunity that was our primordial Earth. We know how cellular membranes formed, we know that the required proteins could form from non-organic compounds and we know how they would be able to meet all in the same place -- what we don't know is the precise chemical process which initiated self-replication. That being said, we have a clear picture between the two sides, we know when, where and what happened, all we know is the "how". Complexity from that point is just a matter of time, we know now about emergence and that it was just a waiting game. Sexual reproduction helps too. Yours Truly, Sam_Spade
That's annoying. I said "to a certain extent". I don't believe evolution explains everything. I'm not the least bit religious so I'm not arguing against science, I am just saying it cannot be "simply" explained through evolution. I hadn't even heard of the Drover trial, thanks for bringing that to my attention. It seems as though the final decision was based on the assertion of prosecution that the intelligent design theory is modern creationism, and teaching that would violate the establishment clause. I am not completely convinced though. If you wouldn't mind explaining how the flagella motor could arise through evolution I'd appreciate it. Is the Darwinist explanation simple mutation?
earth+water+carbon+lightning+moon= a good place to mix up some shit. it has something to do with the moon not sure why but the moon used to be alot closer so there.