[Gumlegs]

I’m betting $100 you’ll go with the first one because he posts long winded threads that use words too big for most people to understand without effort, and which make his posts ‘look official’ because they carry the estemed title of ‘science’- despite hte FACT that this same said sciecne lacks ANY evidence to back it up and worse yet, the evidence which does exist refutes the assumptive driven claims being made in said scientific articles! But no worries- they have ‘big words’- tyhat’s all that matters apparently You lose.

[CottShop]

[[Anyway, don’t bother your pretty little head. Just tell me about “hte mathematical impossibilities.” of evolution.]]

you know fukll well the impossibilities. You ALSO know full well the impossibilities associated with abiogensis- which are myriad- You also know it is impossible for amino acids to make hte leap to the necessary protiens, and you know it is impossible for DNA to survvie without first havign established the repair mechanisms- which is why Science abandoned that claim and instead are now tryign to claim life and info started with RNa- which ALSO has it serious problems associated with it

[[Start with an unknown atmosphere ...]]

Had rto be an atmosphere RIFE with incredibly intense destruction in order to ‘spark life’ (Which incidently would have destroyed it just as quickly)

[[containing unknown chemicals ...]]

Inknown chemicals? Ah but we do know the chemicals present which supposedly ‘sparked life’ (By the way, the ‘life’ that would have been sparked would have included both left and right hand amino acids which would have destroyed each other provided any escaped the destructive ofrces that ‘created them’

[[in unknown combinations ...]]

They do know the combinations- Are yo forgetting abotu hte famous tests that failed miserably?

[[and unknown proportions ...]]

you know, posting several rediculous questions won’t bolster your claim any- Proportions are known- Amino acids WERe created in a carefully controlled and isoalted lab scenario.

[[and over an unknown period of time...]]

According to who? Those with a priori assumptions? How long would it need? How do you know the earth has been around that long? What methods are you using to date these supposed long ages with?

[[under unknown and changing conditions ...]]

you know that htey changed how?

[[in an unknown number of generations...]]

What has the number ofr generations got to do with biological impossibilites?

[[demonstrate what’s impossible.]]

There’s plentyonline showing hte biological impossibilites- I’ve posted quite a bit before- knowck yourself out- I said I’ll tackle Ichy’s claims tomorrow, that will be work enough for me. in the meantime, it is biologically impossible for a species to gain non species specific/allowed info via the Darwinian mechanism that results in ever upward self assembly and increasing complexities- the ONLY way to get this info is through lateral gene transference which means that other species HAD to be prtesent in higher forms right fro mthe get go- but you run into several serious problems EVEN if this is the case as each species has built in parameters that prevent hte perversions to their kind that would be absolutely necessary IF macroevolution even has a spittign chance. Then you run into several other problems when tryign to alter the species in the absolutely necessary manner it would take to move htem beyond hteir own kinds which make it even more impossible if that were even possible.

For now though, Start with the ‘impossibility of amino acids changing to protiens’ issue- it just gets worse and worse fro mthat point forward biologically, as well as Mathematically! ‘Unkonwns’ about hte past aren;’t goign to prop your case up any UNLESS you beleive those unknowns were capable of bypassing biological realities in, oh, I dunno, A supernatural manner?