See something you'd like to change or add, but you've never edited an open encyclopædia before? This overview was written to help absolute beginners get started.

User talk:HaveFaith

From A Storehouse of Knowledge
Jump to: navigation, search

G'day HaveFaith, and welcome to aSK. We are glad to have you contribute. For more information about aSK, see our About statement. Please see the rules and regulations as soon as you can.
The following links are also useful.

lots of debates - therefore is highly controversial

  • Politics
  • Theory of Gravity
  • Medicine
  • Language
  • mathematics

Loads more. You have set a new standard in controversy! Ace McWicked 04:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

You fail to understand my argument, which is there are many debates about whether or not evolution happens. there are no debates about the existence of mathematics or medicine. You also ignore the fact that gravity is past the "theory" stage, it has been accepted as a fact. † Have Faith ♥ 04:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Gravity is still a theory and Evolution has been accepted as fact. Oh yeah, not to mention creationists admit evolution is fact, only within "kinds" though. Ace McWicked 04:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You are wrong because you have your facts mixed up. evolution is just a theory and gravity has been accepted as fact.† Have Faith ♥ 04:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, it is called the Theory of Gravity. Do you know what Theory means? Ace McWicked 04:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
A theory is a idea that has not yet been accepted as a fact. gravity is not a theory. it is not called theory of gravity. † Have Faith ♥ 04:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
1. Theory
2. This is all moot anyway. LowKey 05:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
BTW, Ace. Grey Aliens have also been accepted as fact. :) LowKey 05:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Gravity is not called the Theory of Gravity? Oh, you are a special one! Ace McWicked 05:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
If Gravity is a theory, its a suburb theory. evolution is just a tentative theory at best!† Have Faith ♥ 19:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Gravity is a theory just like Germ Theory, Atomic Theory and Theory of Evolution. Ace McWicked 20:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You are ignoring the comment i made above, and ignoring the theory article. yes they are all theories, but theories are not created equal. like for example the theory that bubble gum can cure disease or the theory that humans evolved from monkeys.† Have Faith ♥ 21:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I see that you're just as scholarly and well-informed as the rest of the creationists here. Welcome to one of the few places on the internet where it's against the rules to say what you deserve to hear. Teh Terrible Asp 21:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Lets start at the beginning. First you deny Gravity was a theory and claim Evolution was just a theory now you accpet gravity is a theory but decide that evolution isn't much of a theory anymore. Evolution is as much a theory as gravity. Because you don't like it or don't understand it doesn't mean it is any less valid. Ace McWicked 21:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I understand the theory of evolution perfectly. you believe that:

1. All Life on earth was first created out of dust or dirt or something
2. that over a really really really really really really really really long period of time animals can somehow magically transform into other animals, and that Man is just another animal that "evolved" from another animal! Ridiculous!† Have Faith ♥ 22:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

1. Sky man creates man from dust or dirt or something
2. Sky man leaves no evidence of himself. Ridiculous! Ace McWicked 22:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
See Holy Bible.† Have Faith ♥ 22:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Why? Ace McWicked 22:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Because, silly, that is where you will find God, and i mean the book, not the wiki article or anything else online.† Have Faith ♥ 22:28, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I have read the Bible but found no God. Interesting story though. Ace McWicked 22:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You must have failed to understand its teachings.† Have Faith ♥ 22:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
No, it just takes more than a book to convince me of a God. Ace McWicked 22:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

None of the hypotheses for abiogenesis propose that life was "created" out of "dust or dirt." Nor is variation and selection "magic"; last I checked, scientists (and likely you!) have observed both. Sterile 23:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

If two monkeys have a baby, what species is the baby?
A. Dolphin
B Human
C Lion
D Monkey
"None of the hypotheses for abiogenesis propose that life was "created" out of "dust or dirt."" That is correct, i forgot it was actually some sort of goo.† Have Faith ♥ 00:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
D - monkey. And no, it wasn't goo, it was organic molecules and protein strands - though I don't know enough about abiogenesis. Ace McWicked 01:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Well it is somewhat hard to study :) You do point to a key problem with the concept. Protein strands are only known to be produced by biologic process.
some sort of goo seems like a reasonable description (and IMO was an wonderful riposte). LowKey 02:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I did say I don't know enough about abiogenesis to be able to describe it, unlike Philip I am not going to try and argue about something I don't really understand properly. I am sure someone could enlighten both of us. Just for the record though, organic molecules have been found outside of earth so not that rare. Ace McWicked 02:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
for abiogenesis check out Dr. Jack Szostak (2009 Mobel Prize Winner) and an article on mica HERE. In very general terms what they are finding is that self replicating molocules aren't that hard to get, but the cell membrane is the hard part. Tiny holes in material near ocean vents and/or the spaces between mica sheets may provide a protected environment where self replicating molocules get started and build cell membranes. Hamster 03:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
just to keep you guys on track, GRAVITY is explained as "things fall down" or a slightly more complex, "things fall toward the center of mass" , the why is not understood. Gravity as explained by einstein fails at small scales, and may not work the same at large scales. A quantum theory of gravity is needed, but doesnt exist yet. Dont leap off any high places because plummeting is almost certain but thats about it. Hamster 03:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Google interstellar protein, among many others the following are quite reputable sources:
While others have observed glycolaldehyde in the Milky Way Galaxy,1,2 this is the first report of glycolaldehyde in a star-forming region "where planets orbiting newly formed stars are expected to exist."
Why has this discovery renewed speculation about life on other planets? Glycolaldehyde is a simple sugar, or monosaccharide, in the most basic two-carbon form (CAS Registry Number(R) 141-46-8). Despite its simplicity, the authors suggest that glycolaldehyde is "directly linked to the origin of life" due to its fundamental role in the synthesis of ribose (CAS Registry Number 50-69-1), a key component in the cellular macromolecule ribonucleic acid (RNA). (etc)

American Chemical Society

More:
Amino acids are the essential molecular components of living organisms on Earth, but the proposed mechanisms for their spontaneous generation have been unable to account for their presence in Earth's early history. The delivery of extraterrestrial organic compounds has been proposed as an alternative to generation on Earth and some amino acids have been found in several meteorites. Here we report the detection of amino acids in the room-temperature residue of an interstellar ice analogue that was ultraviolet-irradiated in a high vacuum at 12 K. We identified 16 amino acids; the chiral ones showed enantiomeric separation. Some of the identified amino acids are also found in meteorites. Our results demonstrate that the spontaneous generation of amino acids in the interstellar medium is possible, supporting the suggestion that prebiotic molecules could have been delivered to the early Earth by cometary dust, meteorites or interplanetary dust particles.

Nature

There's more if you look. User11 06:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

(OD) Well I looked. The only source that actually said protein had been found was Fortean Times. I do hope that's not one of your "quite reputable sources". LowKey 10:49, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about proteins per se but organic molecules have been found outside the solar system in at least two places. Ace McWicked 11:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say that proteins had been found: precurser molecules; sugars & amino acids aplenty though. User11 11:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

So, LowKey, what did God do to put together Adam? Did he take goo or dirt or what? And how did he poof Adam together? Did that violate any scientific laws? Please clarify. Sterile 00:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Evolution is as much a theory as gravity. Not in the sense that the latter is a theory about something that is not disputed to exist and which is testable because it exists in the present, whilst the former is a "theory" about something that has not been observed and which the very existence of is disputed.
Ace: Lets start at the beginning. First you deny Gravity was a theory and claim Evolution was just a theory now you accpet gravity is a theory but decide that evolution isn't much of a theory anymore. Asp: I see that you're just as scholarly ... as the rest of the creationists here. Of course. Good creationists change their mind when presented with sufficient evidence.
...you believe that .. animals can somehow magically transform into other animals... No, they don't claim that magic is involved, just as we don't claim it (despite their accusations).
No, it just takes more than a book to convince me of a God. I don't think anything would convince you.
And no, it wasn't goo, it was organic molecules and protein strands - though I don't know enough about abiogenesis. "Goo" seems a reasonable description of that, and perhaps you don't know enough about abiogenesis because it's an idea that doesn't work.
unlike Philip I am not going to try and argue about something I don't really understand properly. It doesn't stop you arguing about creation.
In very general terms what they are finding is that self replicating molocules aren't that hard to get,... We are talking about (self-replicating) life, not merely molecules.
I didn't say that proteins had been found: precurser molecules; sugars & amino acids aplenty though. No, not explicitly. But HaveFaith did specifically mention proteins, and you introduced your post with Google interstellar protein..., giving the impression that you were providing evidence of proteins.
Did that violate any scientific laws? How can the law-maker violate the laws? Being the law-maker means that He is not subject to them.
Philip J. Rayment 13:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
ok to clarify, you brlirvr in gravity because you can see stuff fall down but you dispute evolution because YOU cant see the evidence and those that can (in their labs) are lying athiests who lack morality ? cool, maybe the Pope will excommunicate Miller if you ask nively. Oh, please explain what 'life' is if self replicating molocules are not life , how about viruses, or prions ? Do you want to go with 'eat, excrete and reproduce' ? Hamster 15:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
found in space are acetamide, glycine, alcohols, aldehydes, and acids, esters and alkyl cyanides. Glycine is an amino-acid.Hamster 15:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
You always forget to greenify the most interesting parts of my posts for some reason, so I will do it for you: what did God do to put together Adam? Did he take goo or dirt or what? And how did he poof Adam together? Sterile 15:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
ok to clarify, you brlirvr in gravity because... No, I wasn't talking about why I believe one and not the other. I was merely talking about how the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution are quite different in their status of "theories".
...those that can (in their labs) are lying athiests who lack morality ? You know well that I've specifically denied this line of thinking, yet you keep repeating it. That's hardly an honest way to debate.
Oh, please explain what 'life' is if self replicating molocules are not life , how about viruses, or prions ? The scientific definition of "life" is admittedly unclear, but my point was that "self replicating molecule" does not itself mean life, which is what we were talking about.
You always forget to greenify the most interesting parts of my posts for some reason... Always? Genesis 2:7.
Philip J. Rayment 22:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Poe

Honestly, Ace and others, this guy is so Poe. Please tell me that you're just egging him on. Edgerunner76 11:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey - firstly nice to see you again Edge! Secondly I was more wondering whether Phil or Brad were going to jump to his defense than anything. Ace McWicked 11:31, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Ace, you should note that I defended you also. LowKey 00:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
My thoughts eggsaccly. Cross in t'signature and everything. User11 11:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Poe or no, my thanks to Ms/Mr/Mrs/Miss HaveFaith for increasing the entertainment value by upping the ridiculosity of the site - but where's the DEMONS? 06:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC) User11

Mr./Ms. Faith wants to load images

HaveFaith has been nominated for membership.

  • If you support this nomination, please add your vote below, on a new line (before the '}}' characters) in the form * '''Support''' ~~~~. If you would like to make further brief comment, you can add that on the same line. In addition, increase the votes parameter of this macro by one.
  • If you oppose this nomination, please indicate that in the same format, except use the word Oppose instead. In this case, do not alter the votes parameter.

Note: Before voting, familiarise yourself with the membership requirements. You must be a Member (or Senior member) in order to vote.

  • Oppose Teh Terrible Asp 15:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC) Oh and let's have a repeat of how disgustingly puerile Philip his creationist cronies acted last time this template was put on the wrong page. That was a delight.
  • Support - KotomiTOhayou! 12:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support OscarJ 15:41, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Obvious poe. Ace McWicked 01:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
visitor navigation
contributor navigation
monitoring
Toolbox