It's either unguided bucket chemistry or it's magic.
Soia showed it is the former.
(off out - later)
Does Anyone Still Believe in God?
by LaurenM 447 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Viviane
Normally when talking in layman's terms we would describe enantionmers as being the same molecule but a mirror image just like a left and right hand.
You can use technical terms, you don't need to use "laymans" terms.
In fact, if you're laying out a scientific position, "layman's terms" are the exact opposite of what you should be doing. If you want to discuss homochirality, just say it.
They have all the same properties and when formed in the lab the left and right hand form a racemic mixture which is 50% of each enantiomer or stereo isomer.
So far so good.....
Soai showed that an auto catalyst was involved in order for a majority of left handed molecules only were formed in nature.
No, that's not what the Saoi reaction shows.
The L-enantiomer in nature is not a slight surplus it's a huge majority. This is called a homochiral mixture.
That is not what homochiral means.
Cofty said all this means there is no magic involved. This statement is strawman and has no substance.
That is not what a strawman is.
Cofty said he can prove God does not exist. How has he proved proved this to me?
Define "God" in such a way that it can be proved or disproved.
I am not saying it's magic, I am saying an auto catalyst is evidence of guidance.
You misuse the word "evidence". You've shown no chain of linkage, not employed the null hypotheses, not shown causation or correlation.
Nobody has proven my chemistry is wrong. Where is the evidence Viv?
You've not done any chemistry. You've incorrectly posted what Soai reaction is, what it shows, incorrectly used the word "homochiral", incorrectly added the words "only in nature" where it doesn't belong, not shown a shred of evidence for your claims and misunderstood what a strawman it.
-
KateWild
You constantly point to this quirk of living things to suggest the need for a designer. The evidence shows that unguided evolution accounts for it.-cofty
Yes I do, because its personal to me and I love Chemistry. As soon as chemistry proves otherwise I will change my views. I actually disagree and feel the evidence shows guided evolution.
I do however agree with you about other aspects of God. But I think a healthy balanced discussion is what we need on this board for all new comers for them to form their own views.
To be brutally honest I am probably in the camp of I don't know and I can't prove it, but leaning towards there is probably a creator. So I am not rigid in my views. But are you rigid in your views cofty?
Kate xx
-
KateWild
The L-enantiomer in nature is not a slight surplus it's a huge majority. This is called a homochiral mixture.- Kate
That is not what homochiral means.- Viv
Yes that is exactly what a homochiral mixture is.
homochiral
adj ho·mo·chi·ral\ˌhō-mō-ˈkī-rəl\Medical Definition of HOMOCHIRAL
: consisting of only one enantiomer <only about 10% of synthetic chiral drugs are marketed inhomochiral…form—Stu Borman>—ho·mo·chi·ral·i·ty \-kī-ˈral-ət-ē\ noun, plural ho·mo·chi·ral·i·tiesWhat do you think homochiral is?
You are quick to tell posters what you think is wrong about my chemistry but you don't actually correct me. This proves you don't know what you're talking about
Kate xx
-
KateWild
It's either unguided bucket chemistry or it's magic.
Soia showed it is the former - coftySorry I am not convinced, it's still open for discussion, no where in the seven page paper did Soai say it was unguided
Nobody can or can't prove the existence of God, but we a free to believe as we wish without fear of being shunned by society, sadly some are shunned for their views by JWs.
Kate xx
-
Viviane
Yes I do, because its personal to me and I love Chemistry. As soon as chemistry proves otherwise I will change my views. I actually disagree and feel the evidence shows guided evolution.
Your emotions have nothing to do with how chemistry works or what constitutes evidence.
Yes that is exactly what a homochiral mixture is.
You're mixing medical terms with specific terms in chemistry, Kate, a sure sign that someone is attempting to support a tenuous position by confusing the muddying the waters. In chemistry, what you are saying is NOT what homochiral means.
You are quick to tell posters what you think is wrong about my chemistry but you don't actually correct me. This proves you don't know what you're talking about
Yes, we know you don't know what "proof" or "evidence" is. You didn't need to provide us with another example.
BTW, I've noticed that your entire argument is lifted from the website www.godandscience.com, a website that uses junk science, bad information and flat out lies in order support their notion that the Bible is scientific or that science proves god somehow.
They don't know how science works, either.
-
Tenacious
God inspired men to write the Bible.
The Bible contains information that took science many more centuries to discover.
The Bible tells the story of man, how we came to be, and what happens once we no longer 'are'.
The creation itself testifies to us having been created.
-
Viviane
Nobody can or can't prove the existence of God, but we a free to believe as we wish without fear of being shunned by society, sadly some are shunned for their views by JWs.
As soon as you are able to define what god you are talking about, we can move that discussion forward.
Also, you are confusing "shunning" with "debating ideas". No one is shunning anyone.
-
paradisebeauty
@cofty
I believe the bible is the word of God. If you read the Bible, the hope is composed of:
- kingdom of God coming
- immortality for believers
This is what I believe!!
-
Viviane
The Bible contains information that took science many more centuries to discover.
Such as?
The creation itself testifies to us having been created.
I really wish fundies would learn what a tautology is.