Thread: Shoot down main stream theories with conspiracy

Science is a human induced and invented creation.

Wow!
The overwhelming weight of your proof has shattered all my indoctrinated preconceived misconceptions. It's like I have awakened from a daze and now can finally see!
Tell me more.....

Originally Posted by 9999

Mainstream science tries to ignore intelligent design by illustrating how, in theory, a bunch of molecules swimming around in a molten mass magically banged together to form amino acids and eventually DNA. The chances of this happening are so remote that intelligent design has to be the preferred choice by default.

How life began and how complex life evolved are 2 separate questions.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Wow!
The overwhelming weight of your proof has shattered all my indoctrinated preconceived misconceptions. It's like I have awakened from a daze and now can finally see!
Tell me more.....

Well obv I'm not going to go into all the details in one OP but ofc I intend to extrapolate. What is it you disagree with?

Originally Posted by Looper

How life began and how complex life evolved are 2 separate questions.

I'm talking about the very first spark of life. The first single cell organism and the first DNA. It's far more likely to have been designed intelligently than a huge co-incidence.

So was it aliens or allah?

Originally Posted by thaimeme

Science is a human induced and invented creation.

What like posting you're view on a forum

Has science conditioned you Rural,who invented the theories you quote ?

Originally Posted by 9999

It's far more likely to have been designed intelligently than a huge co-incidence.

Nobody knows how life began. Making probability based assertions is fatuous nonsense.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So was it aliens or allah?

Clearly it was the jews. But I don't expect you to add much here than willyesque clever one liners. Carry on.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So was it aliens or allah?

Don;t be silly harry it was Adam and Eve

Originally Posted by Looper

Nobody knows how life began. Making probability based assertions is fatuous nonsense.

Well in science class in high school we were presented with a range of possible theories and an assertion that somehow amino acids formed themselves, and again into DNA by cosmic chance. The idea of intelligent design is not even entertained in main stream science. Not saying I know the answer, but that intelligent design should at least be considered plausible, and probably more probable than what you will read in modern text books. In fact it's almost impossible that DNA code could come to be without intelligent input.

I don't know of any scientist who insists that humans were all hunter gathers 6000 years ago.

Science today calls the Big Bang a theory, so nobody in the science community accepts it as 100 correct or proven. It's simply accepted as the best theory supported by the facts we have ascertained so far, out of all the theories.


If you were going to design life in an intelligent way, why would you create RNA and DNA and then leave it all to chance? Doesn't seem to be a very intelligent way of going about it. If life on earth ( and by extrapolation , all life everywhere) was a product of design, who designed the designer?

Originally Posted by Necron99

don't know of any scientist who insists that humans were all hunter gathers 6000 years ago.

Well yeah I was more talking about civilization, main stream says we started out of hunter gatherer about 10,000 years ago when it was waaaay longer. The sphynx is at least 20,000 years old. Gobekle Teppe is at least 12,000 years old, probably older, at the admission of the main stream themselves, who prefer to just sweep Gobekle Teppe under the carpet than investigate it.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Science today calls the Big Bang a theory, so nobody in the science community accepts it as 100 correct or proven. It's simply accepted as the best theory supported by the facts we have ascertained so far, out of all the theories.

What facts suggest the big bang is the most plausible theory? I'd have thought the singuarlarity ruled it out all together, but what is this other evidence we have access to?

Originally Posted by Necron99

If you were going to design life in an intelligent way, why would you create RNA and DNA and then leave it all to chance?

Because it's necessary for the seed of life to incubate and evolve in the environment its going to inhabit. But more to the point, if DNA code was not intelligently constructed, how the hell did it come into being?

Science ain't no thingymabob. It's a process. One that gave you everything you use today, including the ability to post deep shit on a forum.


Wanna say it don't work? Hey? You wanna do dat?

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by Looper

Nobody knows how life began. Making probability based assertions is fatuous nonsense.

Well in science class in high school we were presented with a range of possible theories and an assertion that somehow amino acids formed themselves, and again into DNA by cosmic chance. The idea of intelligent design is not even entertained in main stream science. Not saying I know the answer, but that intelligent design should at least be considered plausible, and probably more probable than what you will read in modern text books. In fact it's almost impossible that DNA code could come to be without intelligent input.

I am not a scholar in this field. My amateur readings include Dawkins' 'The Greatest Show on Earth' which presented what sounded like plausible descriptions of how the spontaneous replication of complex organic compounds (i.e. life) could arise without miraculous intervention. It has not been achieved in the lab yet but it sounded like it was something that could imaginably be achieved artificially at some point when scientific methods are suitably refined.

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by Necron99

don't know of any scientist who insists that humans were all hunter gathers 6000 years ago.

Well yeah I was more talking about civilization, main stream says we started out of hunter gatherer about 10,000 years ago when it was waaaay longer. The sphynx is at least 20,000 years old. Gobekle Teppe is at least 12,000 years old, probably older, at the admission of the main stream themselves, who prefer to just sweep Gobekle Teppe under the carpet than investigate it.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Science today calls the Big Bang a theory, so nobody in the science community accepts it as 100 correct or proven. It's simply accepted as the best theory supported by the facts we have ascertained so far, out of all the theories.

What facts suggest the big bang is the most plausible theory? I'd have thought the singuarlarity ruled it out all together, but what is this other evidence we have access to?

Originally Posted by Necron99

If you were going to design life in an intelligent way, why would you create RNA and DNA and then leave it all to chance?

Because it's necessary for the seed of life to incubate and evolve in the environment its going to inhabit. But more to the point, if DNA code was not intelligently constructed, how the hell did it come into being?

10,000 years? says who?
Homo Sapiens have been hunter gatherers of a sort since they split.
The San People were living in groups, making tools and poison darts since at least 44,000 bc.

Teppe is a relatively new discovery and it has been dated and is still being excavated, no one is hiding it. Suggestion is that it is a neolithic structure built by a neolithic people.
What is civilization anyway? When did it start? Tool use? Language? A class structure? Agriculture? Irrigation?


The best experts in the world agree that the Sphinx was built in conjunction with the great pyramid by Khefe as part of a large complex in 2600 bc. This is based on the construction of date-able buildings around the Sphinx that were built with the rock excavated in it's construction.

Who says it's 20,000 years old, what are their qualifications and what proof have they provided?


Are you an expert on singularities?
The theory is there, go ahead and disprove it, the world awaits with bated breath.


An intelligence with the power you suggest could just create the whole thing complete. No need t much about with evolution. Just like Sim City.
Who designed the designer?

God...

Originally Posted by Necron99

10,000 years? says who?
Homo Sapiens have been hunter gatherers of a sort since they split.
The San People were living in groups, making tools and poison darts since at least 44,000 bc.

Not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying main stream science is open to the fact that we had things like writing, construction, mathematics etc more than 10,000 years ago?

Originally Posted by Necron99

Teppe is a relatively new discovery and it has been dated and is still being excavated, no one is hiding it. Suggestion is that it is a neolithic structure built by a neolithic people.
What is civilization anyway? When did it start? Tool use? Language? A class structure? Agriculture? Irrigation?

Again not sure where you are going here. It's pretty hard to hide by you can be sure it's being supressed. Here is solid archaelogy that turns the whole story of human social evolution on its head. You'd think it would be looked at a bit more vigorously and make a few more headlines.

Originally Posted by Necron99

The best experts in the world agree that the Sphinx was built in conjunction with the great pyramid by Khefe as part of a large complex in 2600 bc. This is based on the construction of date-able buildings around the Sphinx that were built with the rock excavated in it's construction.

Who are the best experts?

The best geologists in the world will tell you the water erosion on the Sphynx is at least 30,000 years old. Heaps of other dudes agree. It's in a conspiracy youtube clip somewhere cant find it right now but will let you know.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Who says it's 20,000 years old, what are their qualifications and what proof have they provided?

Geologists mentioned above.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Are you an expert on singularities?
The theory is there, go ahead and disprove it, the world awaits with bated breath.

Of course I'm not an expert. Some other dudes have done a pretty good job of explaining how the big bang is next to impossible. It's in this along with heaps of other great stuff:

Originally Posted by Necron99

An intelligence with the power you suggest could just create the whole thing complete. No need t much about with evolution. Just like Sim City.
Who designed the designer?

All I'm saying is that no theory including the ones taught in schools as possibilities are just fiction bordering on impossible, and the nature of DNA (as well as other things in the universe) is cause enough to assume that, with no other plausible explanation, if must have been done by design. Expecting me to name the designer is as good as asking you for conclusive proof that DNA fused itself together in a molten mass.

Originally Posted by Looper

I am not a scholar in this field. My amateur readings include Dawkins' 'The Greatest Show on Earth' which presented what sounded like plausible descriptions of how the spontaneous replication of complex organic compounds (i.e. life) could arise without miraculous intervention. It has not been achieved in the lab yet but it sounded like it was something that could imaginably be achieved artificially at some point when scientific methods are suitably refined.

I'm no scholar either but I think they did replicate at least Amino acids being created in the Muller-Urey experiment under perfect conditions in a test tube. I suppose it comes down to how plausible these theories are that explain the creation of something such as DNA without intelligent input. Things fall into place much nicer when we can assume DNA and the building blocks of the univers (laws of physics etc) was designed.

Graham Hancock should be everyone's admirable hero....

My life began when my dad smashed my mum's back doors in.

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by Necron99

An intelligence with the power you suggest could just create the whole thing complete. No need t much about with evolution. Just like Sim City.
Who designed the designer?

All I'm saying is that no theory including the ones taught in schools as possibilities are just fiction bordering on impossible, and the nature of DNA (as well as other things in the universe) is cause enough to assume that, with no other plausible explanation, if must have been done by design. Expecting me to name the designer is as good as asking you for conclusive proof that DNA fused itself together in a molten mass.

A liquid chemical soup churning for billions of years with ice, fire and electricity, a veritable google of chemical interactions taking place every second for those billions of years is bound to produce lots of things.

Much more plausible than a mystical designer of which there is not a single shred of proof, nor plausible theory into how such a mystical designer came into being.
I don't want a name, if their is a designer, who so you suppose designed him?

Originally Posted by Necron99

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by Necron99

An intelligence with the power you suggest could just create the whole thing complete. No need t much about with evolution. Just like Sim City.
Who designed the designer?

All I'm saying is that no theory including the ones taught in schools as possibilities are just fiction bordering on impossible, and the nature of DNA (as well as other things in the universe) is cause enough to assume that, with no other plausible explanation, if must have been done by design. Expecting me to name the designer is as good as asking you for conclusive proof that DNA fused itself together in a molten mass.

A liquid chemical soup churning for billions of years with ice, fire and electricity, a veritable google of chemical interactions taking place every second for those billions of years is bound to produce lots of things.

Much more plausible than a mystical designer of which there is not a single shred of proof, nor plausible theory into how such a mystical designer came into being.
I don't want a name, if their is a designer, who so you suppose designed him?

GOD as a masculine entity.

How conditioned some are.
Disconnected.

Originally Posted by Necron99

A liquid chemical soup churning for billions of years with ice, fire and electricity, a veritable google of chemical interactions taking place every second for those billions of years is bound to produce lots of things.

See that's where they get you. Billions of years is a long time and lots of stuff happenned in primordial soup therefore spontaneous manifestation of complex organic molecules is heaps more probable than design.

If you are so sure, then what is the probability of DNA coming together in the soup that was 10 billion years ago? Is there a solid equation incorporating time over stuff happening that shows conclusively that these molecules banging together is probable?

If you're unable to quatify the real chance of this happening, how can you rule out design? Now I'm not here saying it was intelligent design. I'm saying it's just as plausible, if not more so, than all the main stream theories.

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by 9999

It's far more likely to have been designed intelligently than a huge co-incidence.

Nobody knows how life began. Making probability based assertions is fatuous nonsense.

Charles Darwin - Evolution of Species

Worth a read..