[GodGunsGuts]

ping!

[DevNet]

“Indeed, certain ribonucleotides that are linked together to make RNA cannot form naturally in solutions”

Then how are they formed in the human body?

[svcw]

ut oh, this could be good....
My uncle (who said he was an atheist) became a ‘born again Christian’ while he was studying to get his PhD in geology.
He said it was strange the more he studied the more he realized that there was a Creator and it is demonstrated over and over in the geological record.
The responses to your post are going to be interesting.

[knarf]

I think someone sees the end of grant money and had better come up with the only conclusion ... there is God, and He created all in the beginning.

[Dog Gone]

The insistence that this laboratory work shows any kind of blind evolutionary process contradicts the fact that these research efforts were not “blind,” but directed and purposeful.

Who insisted that? Why isn't this a classic strawman argument?

[count-your-change]

Hype and hope in a test tube. Personally I liked the electric arc in the big glass vessel better. Pop! Zap! just doesn’t happen in some cloudy soup.

[Coyoteman]

You've got to be kidding!

Creationists actually see this laboratory experiment as evidence of creation and deities?

Sorry, but your capacity for self-delusion has just hit a new high.

[EternalVigilance]

Joyce says he has no idea how to clear this hurdle with his team’s RNA molecule.

Wait. Eventually SOMETHING is bound to happen!

I mean, hey, after a few billion years those monkeys are certain to have figured out how to write something millions of times more complex than a Beethoven symphony at least once!

Well, that is if you start out with some monkeys...and a pen...and paper...and instruments...

[tpanther]

Yup...just like the chemist observed, even the lab experiments themselves require intelligent design to get off the ground.

[theBuckwheat]

At the very same time evolutionists insist their theory is not about how life originated, there would be nothing to naturally select, and nothing to randomly mutate unless somehow living cells not only appeared but were sufficiently functional as to be able to successfully reproduce the very first time.

I have seen zero evidence that this ever happened, and what few theories that have been put forth are shamefully flimsy coming from such learned scientists and academics.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Abiogenesis has a long and respectable (haha) history as part of evolutionary science. Though the Haeckelian monists are surely the craziest writers on the emergence of life from psychomatic crystals and primordial plastidules, here's something american, a very amusing fake science book by Darwin Medalist Henry Fairfield Osborn. It's about abiogenesis and goo-to-you evolution, with a distinctly monistic aftertaste:

The Origin and Evolution of Life

That book was cited by top evolutionary scientists. You'll need WinDjvu to read it. Well worth going through at least the first third.

[Earthdweller]

Of course an extremely intelligent being could have created us, what is so difficult to understand. LOL.

And science has proved that we are indeed living beings in the womb. As we become more intelligent, the pieces start falling into place. The stubborn still will not care...they want us as slaves and organized religion is a threat to power.

[ColdWater]

But it “evolved” only after “Joyce's team created” it.

I thought only God could create life?