Alan McDougall

That is a very profound answer, the best in my opinion!

Thank you staff member I read carefully what you said!

A famous experiment revealed a major difficulty for undirected abiogenesisbecause life at the cellular level generally does not reveal a gradual increasein complexity as it allegedly ascends the evolutionary ladder from protozoa tohumans. The reason why the molecular machinery and biochemistry of modernorganisms is basically similar is that the basic biochemical requirements andconstraints are the same for all life.<a http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v18/n2/abiogenesis/

I agree! In a way we are all time travellers because we move with the arrow of time from the present moment into the future. You are right we can time travel into the future in one direction only, as far as we know, by speed/energy/mass/gravity, even at the relatively slow speed of a Jet Fighter, time dilation kicks in , albelit minutely. Thus, the movement of the Jet slows time around it, relative to the faster moving time on the ground. Both Richard Feynman and Alan Guth have speculated about time travel but lets go into that in more detail late!

I obviously knew why I was constantly accused of fallacious aguments and strawman comments, but I have difficulty avoiding them, due to my lack of understanding of even the basics of biology. Limited to high school senior level only. I am now learning about more advanced biology, by reading up what I can and able to comprehend with my limited knowledge of the subject matter. However, I started the thread, because like most people, I would like a scientific answer for how life came into existence from non-life billions of years ago. I will try my utmost in future to pose meaningful questions, with sufficient detail so that a reasonable reply can be offered by more informed members in the forum. In my own speciality I would obviously not have made the same debating mistakes as I did in this topic, which by the way has generated huge interest! Science remains fairly deterministic despite some acceptance of concepts like emergent complexity. The concept of randomness is hard for the average person, me, to understand as it is not interchangeable with chance or accident as used in a debate like this topic, is it? Alan

I you refering to me I know what a fallicious arguments are? ********************************** [mod edit] Alan McDougall continued his post by placing a complete list of all fallacies, which was HUGE. He also failed to link to the original source. Anyway, the size of the post alone was enough to intervene. Personally, I prefer this list of fallacies on Wikipedia. Alan, please don't sabotage our forum. You know nobody was gonna read all that.

Hi, Some astronomers and psycisists theorise around the possibilty of time travel, one example is the concept of a block universe (which I do not agree with!), where all events that have ever happened or will happen continue to exist in an infinity of identical universes. As far as we know there have never been any evidence of time travellers coming to our present from the past or the future. However,maybe an civilisation a billion years in advance of our own might have solved the problem? What is your position on the matter?

Beautiful post, thank you! I wrote the below in another thread but it seems to reflect what you said in your last chapter above. I hope you dont find it silly but it just a theory of mine? We never really reach a moment in time, just when we think we have the next moment is already there. There is always a blur at both ends no matter how close one observes them. I once wrote a short paper on the subject, however, I used an arrow and how it flies toward its target always a blur , I rationalized this by saying the movement of the arrow was like infinitely tiny frames on a movie reel, jumping between moments rather than a smooth flow through the air like the flow of a river. If we stand still relative to the universe, time still moves, but once a person starts to move relative to the universe around them, time slows, this effect of course can only be seen in a meaningful way at colossal speeds approaching the of the speed of light. Some physicists say, however, that there is no real"Arrow of Time" or that time flows smoothly like a river, but time is in reality infinity of separate infinitively tiny moments, extending back to the eternal past and into the eternal future, in both directions from the moment we exist in the present. To understand the theory of infinitely of moments making up the reality of the universe, think of a loaf of bread as the universe and each grain of wheat in the loaf (universe) as a moment or "Now" somewhere in the universe?. The Left side of the loaf the moment of creation the right into the Infinite future Loaf or universe NOW ^ ^ Big Bang=Past<.................................<NOW>.............................................................>Future>>>>>>>> v NOW v Someone on the other side of the universe, directly opposite, could exist in very the same "NOW" moment as you are. Like slicing the loaf directly in front of you are linking with every other ""NOW" across the time frame you exist in across the whole universe Thus a universal "NOW"exist across the in the universe at that moment! However the very next moment the "NOW's" no longer agree and you must make another slice to see what is happening at the other end of the universe, because the "NOW' moments jump to different "NOWS" because of the effect of gravity, mass, speed and relativity. However, if you were to slant your hypothetical knife to the left across the universe, which is towards the past from your vantage moment in time" you would hypothetically be able to view what, is going on in the "NOW"moment in the past for of the object you first viewed in the same moment or"NOW" that was in sync originally with your original moment or "NOW". You would be looking at the past of the far off object. Your "NOW' and its "NOW" would differ in time and space. You would continue to exist in the ever-jumping subjective "NOW" but could look into the past of the object in its objective "NOW". The same will happen if you took the hypothetical knife, sliced the loaf or universe to the right, toward the future, then you will be able to observe what is going on in the future of the objects "NOW" future. Thus, every moment that has ever existed from the very beginning of its existence until its end be it heat death or infinite eternity past, to the present, to the infinite future still exists in our universe and the law's of physics cater for that fact Regards Alan

Thank you so much! for a concise and fairly easy explanation of my problem, with DNA and protein synthesis, instead of putting me down you have helped me to better understand the processes of ambiogneses theory .I did not consider RNA as a precurser to DNA in the ultimate evolution of life on earth

What makes ambiogeneses and the DNA genetic code a riddle to me, is that DNA is without biological function unless translated, that is unless it leads to synthesis of proteins, whose structure had to be created, somehow from within its own DNA code. How then was the original DNA translated, except by using certain products of its own translation? This is a baffling puzzle to me , a circle a puzzing engima for any attempt to form a scientific theory that give a real answer to the geneses of DNA coding?

Stop looking through your own microscope to extract meaning from statementsthat are simply not there. Why for instance can't I use capitals for Atheist Biologists, I would have used the same for Evolutionary Biologist; it is justmy method of writing, no hidden meaning as your suspicious mind supposes. You tell others to lighten up, take your own advice, and stop telling people how to debate avoid insults so we can return to the topic at hand. As for Abiogenesis,it happened but we don't know how it happened although I admit there are good scientific theories for how it happened. My problem is really how it happened so quickly after the formation of the earth some three billion years ago?

I am the possibly the least arrogant person on the forum , take a careful look at yourself and your hurtful comments, before pointing fingers! Stupid am I stupid prove it ??? I made no assumption that "all biologist are atheitistic", I said "Atheist Biologists" this means there are biologists that are not Atheists, that should be obvious to anyone with even the smallest tiny mind and you stop being so aggressive to me! By the ant farm analogy I did not mean that the universe was designed specifically for humans, but that it might be an experimental lab of a much higher intelligence than ours. Some ant farmers experiment with their ants, depriving them of food and warmth etc, so observe how they adapt to unusual circumstances If you dislike me so much ask the moderator to remove me from the forum, no skin off my nose at that?

body { background: #FFFFFF; margin: 0px; padding: 4px; font-family: verdana, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 9pt; } font { font-size: 9px; } font { font-size: 13px; } font { font-size: 15px; } font { font-size: 17px; } font { font-size: 21px; } font { font-size: 26px; } font { font-size: 36px; } I am not a physicist , nevertheless, I wrote the below article for you more informed guys to take apart if you like! We never really reach a moment in time, just when we think we have the next moment is already there. There is always a blur at both ends no matter how close one observes them. I once wrote a short paper on the subject, however, I used an arrow and how it flies toward its target always a blur like at each end. I rationalized this by saying the movement of the arrow was like infinitely tiny frames in a movie reel, jumping between moments rather than a smooth flow through the air like the flow of a river. If we stand still relative to the universe around us, time still moves, but once a person starts to move relative to the universe, time slows, this effect of course can only be seen in a meaningful way at colossal speeds approaching the of the speed of light. Some physicists say, however, that there is no real"Arrow of Time" or that time flows smoothly like a river, but time is in reality infinity of separate infinitively tiny moments, extending back to the eternal past and into the eternal future, in both directions from the moment we exist in the present. To understand the theory of infinitely of moments making up the reality of the universe, think of a loaf of bread as the universe and each grain of wheat in the loaf (universe) as a moment or "Now" somewhere in the universe?. The Left side of the loaf the moment of creation the right into the Infinite future Loaf or universe Big Bang=Past<.................................<NOW>.............................................................>Future >>>>>>>>>?? Someone on the other side of the universe, directly opposite, could exist in very the same "NOW" moment as you are. Like slicing the loaf directly in front of you are linking with every other ""NOW" across the time frame you exist in across the whole universe Thus a universal "NOW"exists across the in the universe at that moment! However the very next moment the "NOW's" no longer agree and you must make another slice to see what is happening at the other end of the universe, because the "NOW' moments jump to different "NOWS" because of the effect of gravity, mass, speed and relativity However, if you were to slant your hypothetical knife to the left across the universe, which is towards the past from your vantage moment in time" you would hypothetically be able to view what, is going on in the "NOW"moment in the PAST for of the object you first viewed in the same moment or"NOW" that was first in sync originally with your original moment or "NOW". You would be looking at the PAST of the far off object. Your "NOW' and its "NOW" would differ in time and space. You would continue to exist in the ever-jumping subjective "NOW" but could look into the PAST of the object in its objective "NOW". The same will happen if you took the hypothetical knife,sliced the loaf or universe to the right, toward the future, then you will be able to observe what is going on in the FUTURE of the objects "NOW" future. Thus, every moment that has ever existed from the very beginning of its existence until its end be it heat death or infinite eternity past, to the present, to the infinite future still exists in our universe and the law's of physics cater for that possibilty Regards Alan

Likewise you can not prove to me or anyone that God does not exist? You make a valid point but the God of most religions has the qualities of Omniscience, Omnipresence and Omnipotence thus if it exists according to their faith is infinite in all those aspects of its Being. I cant prove to you that Gods exists I only have my personal experience of him that brought me back from the edge of death and madness, into his eternal domain of love and promise of eternal existence with him. I dont for one second believe God is exclusive in his love toward man, as many religions would have you believe. God loves everyone!

Atheistic Biologists would in my opinion state that the odds of life evolving by chance as 1 to 1 or 100% because we most definitely have life? Creationists or ID advocates would argue from an equally stubborn position that the odds are so huge that it was impossible for life to evolve by chance alone and at least needed some sort of a guiding hand to complete the process from non-life to living entities. Maybe the universe is a huge petre dish or lab primed for life by natural processes within itself. Maybe we are an experiment of some higher reality, like the famous Ant farm analogy?

This is what is believed about God? What type of citation would satisfy you?

Einstein's theory of relativity did not say "everything is relative", it said that there is no absolute space-time coordinate system, so there are no absolute positions in time and space. All times and positions are relative This is what I meant I regret I did not express myself correctly, how can I change the thread title?

God being Infinitely more intelligent than any human could create a being directly from mud, or even leave the mud out and just make man directly from the elements of his creation Tus I agree?

I was responding to Greg H post it had to do with my statement about the percentage of adult Americans who believe in God or an Intelligent designer. He said they were not the same thing and I ageed with him. It was not an argument for ID just aresponse to his post You make statements as if they were fact, I agree that what you state about how life coming into existence is the best theory, but it as of now remains a theory, because we do not even have a good definition of what life exactly isor how it suddenly appeared so early in earths history some 13 billion yearsago

I know this and dont think it is a fallacious argument , because I can access statistics to prove what I stated . I said God or an intelligent designer. Together they make up 90% quoted by me! Intelligent design is modest in what it attributes to thedesigning intelligence responsible for the specified complexity in nature. Forinstance, design theorists recognize that the nature, moral character andpurposes of this intelligence lie beyond the competence of science and must beleft to religion and philosophy." (William Dembski, The DesignRevolution, pg. 42) http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_the_US_believes_in_intelligent_design Center for Science &Culture On the other hand, the Center for Science & Culture, which supportsIntelligent Design, claimed much higher percentages in 2001: "Gallup poll after Gallup poll confirms that about 90 percent ofthe U.S. population believes that some sort of design is behind theworld. "While many in the scientificcommunity may question why this issue has been raised again, a new nationalsurvey shows that almost two-thirds of U.S. adults (64%) agree with the basic tenet ofcreationism, that "human beings were created directly by God."" That is only 64% US adults believe that humans are created directly by God (aposition I do not subscribe to, my idea is evolution directed by intelligence)my comment! As everyone from 19th-century British PrimeMinister Benjamin Disraeli to American Author Mark Twain have been quoted,"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics Give me some space I am learning to debate in a scientific manner in a scientific forum , something I am very new to, but I will do my best to improve my debating skills

I thinkthat "we now share the same purpose", futility in trying to reason that even theremotest possibility of an ID has been met by hostility. Please stay in theforum and put your ideas forward a rational thinking scientist. I am anEngineer and I do not think that qualifies me as a scientist, but I love allthings scientific, nevertheless. There is a rudimentary intelligence at thefundamental particle level and most definitely at the microbial level. Thismight indicate that a much higher intelligence has instilled this intrinsic, endogenousintelligent from the macro to micro levels of reality. This intrinsic abilityto communicate and exchange information at baseline is not present in non-life system.So the question remains how did non-life become life in the relatively shorttime it took to come into existence some three billion year ago on planetearth? Define life dear scientists?

Glad tomake your acquaintances, you are going to get a lot of flack from these Atheists who do not seem to know that 90% of the American people believe in an Intelligent Designer or God. They give man credit for intelligence but dismiss the idea of God as silly nonsense

TIME AND EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE NOTHING ISABSOLUTE Is there any absolute in the universe? Nothing is as it seems to be and all things are subjective realities to theobserver. Everything is relative to each person from the viewpoint of the onlyultimate reality. Every fundamental particle is like a tinyclock of its own each with its own subjective and relative time frame There is no absolute time, time moves differently from one object to the nextand in one location to the next. For example, time moves slower on massiveobjects like the Sun or Jupiter and faster on smaller objects like our Earth.It moves even minutely faster in space. This is no longer a theory, but provenfact. Extremely accurate precision atomic clocks on fast moving spacecraft havedetected this strange phenomenon and proven Einstein’s theory of relativity tobe true. Stop all the clocks in the universe and movement will continue unaffected. Stop all movement (Absolute Zero) and would what we call time will have anymeaning and would nothing ever happen again? Time is like an infinite elastic string maybe in only one direction, namelyinto future moment. The twin paradox describes what happens. One twin boards aspacecraft and travels close to the speed of light, on a voyage to AlphaCentauri, which is about four light years from earth. Some ten years he returns having aged only oneyear compared to his now twenty-year-older twin brother. This is due to timedilation at near light speed. This is just guess estimates by me. A very unlikely but maybe far distantfuture use of this effect is the possibility of reaching some calculated momentin the future. Given enough speed and an huge unlikely energy source needed todrive this very advanced spaceship, it is theoretically possible that, onecould say reach the Olympic Games of the year 3108, in a matter of a fewsubjective days. Backward times travel to the past, is afantasy and if this were possible, a person could do the impossible and go backand murder their younger self. There is no universal now! Nevertheless, inphysics and mathematics the expression of time is reversible.<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;"><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;"> We only conceive of time by themovement of an object through space, so space and time are differentintertwined realities. Is time just an illusion we use to track movement or is it a real part of thefabric of reality? By Alan McDougall 29/8/2007

The important thing to remember is that evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed, this means that it begins with the premise that life already exists. It makes no claims as to how that life got here. It could have developed naturally through abiogenesis. It could have been started by a divine power. It could have been started by aliens. Whatever the explanation, evolutionary explanations begin to apply once life appears and begins to reproduce.

The topic is not about evolution, it is about Abiogenesis or how did life come about from plainly put rock to life? and it this were the case what were the best odds of this happening by chance alone