shoeshine, stop fiddling around with the God-did-it creationists' websites. The palm of your hand will get hairy and you'll go blind.
Well it has exhibited such properties in our small corner, and thereby shown it is not "incredible" but feasible. I don't quite see the gap of credibility. Your serve.
Well, this has obviously turned "apologetic". So, going with that, I don't think your statement is fair, regardless of what viewpoint you're coming from. Scientific integrity always demands that if an ultra low probability event occurs, you ask the questions, "Why?" and "How?" Example: You fall out of an airplane from 30,000 feet and walk away unharmed. Do you just say, "Cool! I'd like to do that again!" Or do you ask, "How could I have survived this fall? Was it God? Was it physics?"
"Surely youâre not arguing that advanced life can survive on a planet with astronomical temperatures? " Have no idea about intelligent life, but considering we already found life in boiling hot geyser streams in Yosemite park why would you ASSUME life cant evolve in conditions which YOU would consider extreme??? Maybe on another planet 500 degrees is cold for a life from. Who knows. Again.... your being very anthropocentric, or in this case SHOE-centric with all your assumptions. Basically.... your being very closeminded to the possibilties and applying your biases to everything else in the universe. peace axeman
Reread the post that you quoted, I made no mention of an afterlife. You are correct in pointing out that if there is nothing after death, there is no way one would "realize" it. What I was trying to convey is that I do not believe shoeshineboy's intentions are to deceive people into believing something he knows to be untrue. Even Osama's followers are not trying to mislead people into accepting their beliefs, they are confident that what they believe is true. If there were some piece of evidence that could clearly demonstrate the mechanism evolution, but you knew the evidence to be a fabricated hoax, would you present it? I doubt it. What would be the point? Again you refer to the mars question as a trick. I will state again, I was only interested in hearing opinions regarding conclusions that would be made based on the hypothetical evidence. Why would people have no trouble accepting that an unknown, unseen, being(perhaps with properties we could not understand) must have built the house--Simply because houses do not build themselves?
What is a right to life, and why does being rational entitle one to it? Do animals have a right to life?
Shoecentric? Now I've been called a lot of things by you guys, but that's a new one! I think you're still missing my point overall. You're not going to get advanced life in a 500 degree environment. Yes, I can't argue that some primitive life can survive in very harsh conditions. Hoyle documented this as well. Also, since we're going into the apologetics of it all, how in the world would carbon string itself together in a 700 degree blast furnace? So far they haven't been able to get it to string to well in ideal lab conditions?
Your still making empty assertions based on huge assumptions. Its amazing that you are "open minded" enough to eagerly believe in an all powerful, all knowing, being that created everything, but so strongly reject the possibility that an advanced life form could survive a 500 degree environment. Wouldn't god qualify as an advanced life form that can survive a 500 degree environment? Your being extremely inconsistent here. If you accept that a being such as god can exist, then accepting the possibility that a 500 degree climate being can exist should be FAR EASIER to swallow. The idea of god is much more absurd than a being that would thrive in 500 degree heat. peace axeman