Ironically, the most compelling evidence in the photo is the arm of the Missing Link.
Posted on 06/24/2002 2:56:50 PM PDT by Texaggie79
To test simply the alleged self-combining tendency of carbon, I placed one microliter of India (lampblack) ink in 27 ml. of distilled water. The ink streaked for the bottom of the test tube where it formed a dark haze which completely diffused to an even shade of gray in 14 hours. The carbon stayed diffused, not aggregated as when dropped on paper. At this simple level, there is no evidence that the "primeval soup" is anything but fanciful imagination.The famous Mastropaolo experiment, refuting the notion that bottled India ink keyed the origin of life. Sounds like a refutation of Intelligent Design to me.
The idea he has heard of but misunderstood is that carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (CHON) have chemical affinities and form compounds which are stable but not overly so. They keep combining and recombining without falling into deep energy wells. (That is, without forming compounds so stable that recombination stops.)
Lampblack in room-temperature water (the Mastropaolo Experiment) doesn't react chemically with anything. It just diffuses and stays diffused, as he notes. The problem with his demonstration is that we already have the Miller experiment of 1953, which showed that it's rather easy to get aminos from simple organic compounds in a reducing atmosphere. Against that, what does Mastropaolo's unimaginative 1-day experiment mean?
Ironically, the most compelling evidence in the photo is the arm of the Missing Link.
Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I agree to a point. Nowadays, why use an eye to try to "prove" intelligent design when a simple strand of DNA is significantly more complicated and unexplainable, though theories abound, and change, and evolve...
Single-celled creatures don't die, at least until something kills them.
Wouldn't evolutionary pressure select for an organism that could lengthen its life? Instead, every thing dies.
Death by aging is an evolutionary advantage. Creatures that live forever can't breed without limit, obviously, so as a species they don't have much opportunity to adapt to changing circumstances. The creatures that have rapid generations have greater adaptability, so they have a greater chance of making it through mass extinctions.
Sure looks that way.....I swear Tex I had nothing to do with it....I came off the thread for a while to eat dinner....hit the reload post...and there he was!!!! You were right...it's really spooky.
1. The Bible is an account of miracles that defy the laws of physics. There is no way to disprove a miracle using scientific tools.
2. The Bible is primarily a spiritual book and it must be understood from a spiritual perspective. The use of the word "kind" and "sort" does not have to fit in with the ever changing definition of the word "species". They are two different things.
Now YOU knock this off. You won't be warned twice.
You tell some good stories. Unfortunately, your "guess" and what you think "perhaps" happened "1 million" years ago is not really the same as the actual truth. It is just a story.
You tell some good stories. Unfortunately, your "guess" and what you think "perhaps" happened "1 million" years ago is not really the same as the actual truth. It is just a story.
Give some examples to compare and contrast the distinctions. I'll help you get started: G3k and medved have claimed that (paraphrasing) "for purposes of discussing evolution" the equidae (horses, donkeys, 2 species of zebra, etc) "are one species". G3k has gone so far as to claim that llamas and (both species of) camels are also one species. Would you say they are the same 'kind'? What about mules?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.