/sci/ - Science & Math

nope, it was all random chance and evolution

and all of this in a mere 4500 million years

>>1021730
Complex mechanisms can arise from similar ones.

Anyone who even took organic chemistry can intuitively discern this.

And DNA replication is far from perfect (cancer, lol)

>The polypeptide formed is folded into proteins by specific chaperone enzymes, creating a functional protein etc etc etc etc.

And when this fails, you get cancer. Clearly, you have offended God if this happens.

I'm a big believer in statistics myself. Statistical analysis says there's number so close to zero that we were by chance, that I simply can't ignore it.

If there was a creator then how do you explain mitochondrial DNA?

Aliens?

>>1021738

im not big into my evolution and it probably shows, but take something like an eye, how in the hell did that just happen to evolve in an organism originally without an eye, even gradually over millions of years??

>>1021763
and do you also believe that we live in a universe so infinitely large that all things are possible?

>>1021730
I don't think you realize just how big the universe is. If you could actually comprehend the size of the observable universe you'd go insane.

>>1021775
Please don't use irreducible complexity as an argument.

>>1021775
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye#Evolution
is it so fucking hard?

3 billion years. 3 BILLION years.

And it's not perfect. Not even close. Cancer, Downs, all sorts of other genetic defects, all caused by shitty mutations, etc.

It's too bad that you've turned away from rationality. You won't be missed.

>>1021775im not big into my evolution and it probably shows, but take something like an eye, how in the hell did that just happen to evolve in an organism originally without an eye, even gradually over millions of years??

0/10

>>1021771


though I do not agree with the other assumption, what you have said makes utterly no sense whatsoever.

I think you are implying with some form of deep assumptions that:

the theories that state that mitochondria were origininally symbiotic organisms living inside other cells implies that we evolved from single cell organisms long before the creation myth.


no one said anything about traditional creationism.


they said they though we were created.


they did not explain the process that lead us to this state.

lol irreducible complexity.

yeah man, but that enzyme evolved.

chaperones are only used in certain cases.


not all proteins require chaperones to fold properly into a metastable state.


indeed, most of the proteins studied using computers DO NOT fold using chaperones (addition of the chaperone to the calculation would literally make it infinitely longer)


protein calculations do not scale linearly with the number of particles.

they scale AT LEAST as N^2, sometimes as N^4

>>1021793
No i'm implying that we have absolutely no need for our mitochondria to have separate DNA but they do anyways. If we were designed then why with such a useless design?

>>1021730
If you think you were designed by something, guess what, you believe in a creator.

>>1021793
The fact that everything has vestigial bits and loads of junk DNA left over from when it looked very different, and every bit looks as if it developed from other things, and there has never been a single irreducibly complex structure found in nature is pretty good evidence that evolution occurred.

>>1021775
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZdCxk0CnN4

Here you go.

>>1021763
Life didn't come about "randomly." And with 30-70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars out there, the chance of life evolving is so incredibly huge that it's almost guaranteed that there is other life out there.

>>1021810
Evolution is by chance, there is no why. Anything that doesn't make sense is conveniently explained away by evolution as "lol it's random!". There you go.

BILLIONS OF YEARS.

i dont think you really comprahend how long that is. Its a number to you. after 3 billion years it is still not perfect.
left over dna. cancer. genetic errors etc.

Fuck.

ITT: /sci/fags get trolled

>>1021816
Thats my point, ergo if you cannot answer why there is no creator. That is my argument.

If you say that it is for reasons we cannot comprehend then you are hiding behind a pseudo argument and i don't want to play with kids like you.

OP, watch this. Fucking do it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjOqWkV1_tk

HELLO I AM NOT GOOD WITH COMPUTER.

I THINK GOD CREATED US BECAUSE IF EVOLUTION WAS TRUE AND EVERYTHING WAS RANDOM WE WOULDN'T BE THERE BECAUSE WE'RE A SO COMPLICATED IT'S IMPOSSIBLE WE HAVE NOT BEEN CREATED ON PURPOSE.

THANK YOU, THIS IS THE ESSAY I WROTE FOR MY FIRST GRADE CLASS

>>1021939

Climbing Mount Improbability, boeing 747 argument misunderstands evolution, gradual process, etc etc

Our cells are pretty complex but they didn't simply spontaneously and instantaneously arrange. 4 billion years of evolution is a while!

>>1021976

A Boeing 747 is a lot simpler and nowhere near the capabilities of the minimum required for a living thing. The argument has some validity.

>>1021834
U mad. Calm down. I was just stating evolution's convenience. It's an answer to everything. If you want me to argue for the converse, than how about the fact that even with evolution you know just as much about mitochondria as you would if you had believed a creator was involved. Now, it makes no sense to you why mitochondria would have their own DNA, and yet there they are doing just fine with it. It's certainly not an inconvenience. It brings to them an incredible resilience and redundancy that standard cells wouldn't have trying to do the same job. According to evolution, because that is a better design it simply thrived. According to creationism, it was part of the plan and started out that way. Both pretty much are saying "just because" when you get right down to it.

But seriously, calm down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

>>1022039
No it does not. It would be like a Boeing factory covering the entire earth spitting out a Boeing after millions of years and with tons of energy.

You underestimate the amount of time and energy required to make life "from scratch."

As for your second part, evolution has evidence, creationism does not.

>>1021730
Listen. We very well may have been designed by something. However, Since there is absolutely NO scientific backing whatsoever to support this claim (and i'm not speaking out of my ass here; there is none), then the entire theory is heresay.
That is all. You may believe it, but you cannot know it.

>>1022086
You're assuming a Boeing equals modern life. The Boeing equals something far simpler and more likely to come about by chance than anything living. Also, you did it again, u mad, u assume. I underestimate nothing and only said the argument has some validity, which it does. It's not even entirely valid, nor is it an argument I adhere to. As for your second part, u still mad.

>>1022101
Right, what good would it do you to believe in something with no evidence? What does it matter if there is a creator, where is this creator now and what have they done lately?

>>1022109
No, you're wrong. Well, you're right about "Boeing is simpler than modern life," but you're wrong about evolution, because modern life did not simply come about "randomly," it evolved over billions of years from very simple life which is far simpler than a Boeing jet. It's just some lipids that replicate over time.

It'd be unlikely for such life to NOT come about in a similar environment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjOqWkV1_tk

This video explains how it works, since you clearly don't understand how incredibly invalid the Boeing argument is.

> This all seems to good to true. Its all so perfect.
Just because YOU cannot do anything right without help does not mean that nature can't.

>>1021730
Okay one question for you then, OP.
That what made us must be more complex than us, right? or at least as complex as us.
What made it?
And if the answer is: nothing, then why can't the answer of our origin be "nothing"?

>>1022141
That Anon's right. Evolution is not random. Imagine you have field of metals and all the necessary resources to build a Boeing. Now, some guy comes by and checks if there is an actual Boeing on this field. Of course, there is not. So he takes all the resources and throws them around. And he does that every time there is something that does not belong to a Boeing. He just takes everything and throws it around. And he does that for quite a long time.
In the end there WILL be a Boeing on this field.

>>1022141
Me, wrong? No, u mad. Calm down. What part of "you're assuming these are even my views" are you not getting? Or are you a perma-trolled anon from /tg/ that just rages at everything?

>>1022175
That requires someone checking. And no one in their right mind would say it is impossible. If you have all the needed parts and keep circulating them, eventually they will collect into the right shape, even if it does take an INCREDIBLY long time.

>>1022180
But I'm not mad at all, nor am I raging. I'm being stern, sure, because you're being stupid, but I'm pretty chill, and I'm not accusing others of being "hurr mad" when they're not.

>>1022148
>That what made us must be more complex than us, right? or at least as complex as us.

That's a false assumption.

>>1022197
Which is exactly the point.

>>1022197
Okay even if it is wrong. It would still be evolution.

0. Life starts (abiogenesis)
1. Thing that created us evolved.
2. It creates us.
3. We evolve to our existing form.

>>1022195
You're being stern, because
>you're being stupid

Not assuming you're mad. You, are, mad. You want to contradict and argue so badly you have assumed that I have taken the "wrong" viewpoint and are "against" it. If you ever finally get what is wrong with what you are doing you are going to feel very stupid. But that is why you're anon, no one will ever know it was you.

> it all seems so perfect
it is.

in fact it's so INCREDIBLY perfect that it's not unlikely to have only occurred ONCE in the entire 15 billion year history of the universe.

so who cares? Your argument is that it's too improbable to have occurred by chance, which would be valid if it were occurring every other day on every other planet, but that's not the case.

read The Blind Watchmaker

u kids are dumbfucks

what happens to the retarded kids in the world? god fell asleep at the wheel?

seriously, this is called logic. no matter how mother fucking SENSE it makes, how tempting it is to believe in a god, it's because we have HUMAN LOGIC. let an alien race see it our way, and they'll think we're a fucked up confusing piece of shit race.

it's the human perspective. inb4 anthropomorphic faggots.

>>1022109The Boeing equals something far simpler and more likely to come about by chance than anything living.

Amino acids automatically assemble themselves under early earth conditions, rivets on jumbo jets do not. Retarded analogy is fucking retarded, it would surprise me if you weren't a troll.

Er. Our bodies are by no means perfect. Mutations fuck us over a lot, and our bodies are much more complex than they would need to be if an intelligent creator had cared to make them.

>>1022293
What the fuck is your point?

No, really, your post is pretty unclear.

The Boeing 747 argument isn't even a good one because it implies that it's unlikely that complex organisms come about immediately by chance. Anyone who knows anything about evolution knows that it's a gradual process not at all analogous to throwing a bunch of scrap together to instantly make something.

Additionally, parts in a junk yard have no means of meaningful selection.

intelligent design
not for the abiogenesis part, but for the human part

>>1022293
> anthropomorphic faggots
Say that to my face fucker not online and see what happens.

>>1022293
>anthropomorphic

I don' think that word means what you think it means..

>>1022293
>anthropomorphic faggots

For the first time in my life I wish I had saved gay furry porn.

>>1022591
DON'T WORRY BRO I GOT YA COVERED

>>1022599
lol'd

>This all seems to good to true. Its all so perfect.

If we were created by something/someone, why do you suppose that something/someone would create something "perfect"? Couldn't it create something abnormal? Maybe it's perfect only for us (in fact, it's far from perfect, but anyway).

>>1022599
Goddamit, why would you save that?

>>1022599
>two dicks in the same ass

How the fuck do you even pull that off..

>>1022657
I'm into furry and I'm into dudes, not that hard to figure out

>>1022661

I've seen it happen.

>>1022661
double anal happens.

google it and post your reaction when your whole worldview changes.

>>1022599

This honestly is awwwrite with me, I dunno why haters gotta hate on here man.
Everybody love everybody.

>>1022668
ah damn it. I retract my lawl. >>1022620


fucking faggot.

That everything is set up just right to work does not in anyway mean we were created. Everything is just right to work, because if it wasn't, it wouldn['t work and so we wouldn't be here. durr hurr.

>>1021810
Mitochondria were their own separate cell that coexisted with regular Prokaryotes. They were eaten by the Prokaryote but could not be digested. The Prokaryote divided, obviously dividing the Mitochondria and everything inside of it as well.

Makes perfect sense to me, especially during a time where cells were all up on eating each other.

>>1022671
Hm well I've seen something I'm sure tha-......

>>1022696
>The Prokaryote divided, obviously dividing the Mitochondria

Obviously.

A batshit creation theory and and furry porn.

My first time on /sci/ hasn't gone well.

>>1022836

You'll get used to it.

>>1022836
IT'S FUCKING MIRACLES YO

>>1022836

Welcome to 4chan. Enjoy your stay.

>>1022836
>furry porn
>click in thread
>two images
I am dissapoint.

>>1022836

DNA replication is not a perfect process. There are many mechanisms that act as built-in safeties, proving that nature is aware of its own inaccuracy.

What is astounding is that this stupendously complex operation took only 4500 millions years to develop. I suspect it may have been around quite a bit longer, i.e. panspermia theory.

>>1022862

That can be fixed...

>>1022862

totally agreed man

So is it official that /sci/ like furry now?..

>>1021730
PROTIP: The "creator" probably had a shitload of tries. Every planet is a failed attempt at life.