10 Useless body parts!? How accurate is this guys.

[جوري]

Muscular pain and disc compression are esoteric? Did you even look at the bit that says it's nearly impossible to find someone who doesn't suffer from back pain?

so-called evolutionary causes are esoteric http://www.islamicboard.com/health-...ody-parts-how-accurate-guys-2.html#post922463... do you have a reading impediment?

Erm yeah, spinal deformation in children is a good cause of back pain but it's not relevant in the majority of cases.
Quite happy to dish it out though I see
Well take one case.

what is this gibberish

Horses suffer from diarrhoea, they also have no appendix and are perfectly happy for it. My intention was solely to point out the flaw iin the original post.
and not many more brain cells.

horses suffer C. difficile colitis? yeah no brain cells indeed an adequate assessment of self?

cheers

 

[Azy]

a paper by Dr. Mullan on evolution

http://www.iscid.org/papers/Mullan_PrimitiveCell_112302.pdf

thus rendering the first an improbable conjecture and based on an a priori judgment!

If I can't accept the parts, I won't accept the whole..
cheers

Yeah an impartial paper from a christian scientist supporter of intelligent design basically making the case that large numbers and random events preclude life from nothing.

TalkOrigins list of creationist claims. When you feel like making a creationist point, first find the relevant section and read why you're wrong before you start.

 

[Asper]

I just wanted to solve the biological mystery was to why men have nipples, not be a beginning post in a debate! Imagine how odd it might look without them!

 

[جوري]

Yeah an impartial paper from a christian scientist supporter of intelligent design basically making the case that large numbers and random events preclude life from nothing.

TalkOrigins list of creationist claims. When you feel like making a creationist point, first find the relevant section and read why you're wrong before you start.

you haven't in fact challenged him on any of his points which I have found quite sound and mathmatical! His confidence interval leaves very little room for error. The most any one can do when theorizing! further assumed for me what it is, I read and don't read... is it my paper can kick your paper's ass without any intelligible thought? if you have something of substance to impart do. If not the Dawkin forum is that way >>>>>>


cheers

 

[Azy]

horses suffer C. difficile colitis?

What does the cause matter when we're simply talking about flushing the colon?

what is this gibberish

A half hearted response to you pasting pages of material on spinal deformity in childhood among other things.

so-called evolutionary causes are esoteric

The original point was that the human spine causes problems in most humans due to the configuration of muscles and the lumbar vertebrae and discs. Walking and sitting upright puts a lot of stress on the back and causes pain in most people at some time in their life. This doesn't sound like a system that was designed to do it's job.

 

[Azy]

you haven't in fact challenged him on any of his points which I have found quite sound and mathmatical!

Probabilities of randomly assembling a primitive cell on Earth.

Even the title is at fault. You could work out the odds of randomly assembling a cell, but that information is totally useless since that's not how it would actually work since biochemistry is not a random process.

 

[جوري]

What does the cause matter when we're simply talking about flushing the colon?

we are not in fact simply talking about flushing the colon. C diff. is antibiotic induced that wipes out natural flora in debilitated pts, even more so in regions where there isn't a swift action to counteract its effect... and in fact would create cataclysmic consequence!

A half hearted response to you pasting pages of material on spinal deformity in childhood among other things.

asinine articles of superficial relevance if any can only be met with the same?

The original point was that the human spine causes problems in most humans due to the configuration of muscles and the lumbar vertebrae and discs. Walking and sitting upright puts a lot of stress on the back and causes pain in most people at some time in their life. This doesn't sound like a system that was designed to do it's job.

Go back to being an ape then.. at least they shut up about their cause for complaining!


cheers

 

[جوري]

Probabilities of randomly assembling a primitive cell on Earth.

Even the title is at fault. You could work out the odds of randomly assembling a cell, but that information is totally useless since that's not how it would actually work since biochemistry is not a random process.

ha? do you just want to take up web space?
what are you trying to say?
Many in fact contend that our existence is nothing but a series of random events that fell into place. I believe the papers addresses that quite adequately further he doesn't simply only address biochemistry, he writes a great deal of molecular bio and mathematics.

cheers

 

[Azy]

we are not in fact simply talking about flushing the colon. C diff. is antibiotic induced that wipes out natural flora in debilitated pts, even more so in regions where there isn't a swift action to counteract its effect... and in fact would create cataclysmic consequence!

To save all this beating around the bush, can you explain to me why a possum would need an appendix for the reason stated but a horse or gopher doesn't? If it's purpose is to safehouse bacteria, why is it a shape that so easily becomes blocked with potentially fatal consequences?

Go back to being an ape then.. at least they shut up about their cause for complaining!

Apes don't have the same pains, they don't walk upright.

Many in fact contend that our existence is nothing but a series of random events that fell into place. I believe the papers addresses that quite adequately further he doesn't simply only address biochemistry, he writes a great deal of molecular bio and mathematics.

We're talking about randomly generating a cell from basic components. Obviously that entails molecular biology, mathematics and biochemistry. It still doesn't change the facts that
1) He's talking about assembling a functioning cell randomly from amino acids. This wouldn't happen in anyone's wildly optimistic dreams and noone has suggested it would. You're fighting an argument that isn't there.
2) It isn't random. Amino acids don't assemble randomly.

Reading the whole thing would numb my brain but a couple of errors on glancing over it. Like you said, "If I can't accept the parts, I won't accept the whole.."

"the cell must be able to reproduce, and for that
the cell needs DNA (or at least RNA)." - see the cell membrane experiment thread for phospholipids that divide and grow spontaneously, or self-replicating peptides

"For reasons that are not yet obvious, only one of these varieties (the L-variety) is actually used in present-day life forms" - p19 on left-handed and right-handed amino acids to reduce the odds on the assumption only left handed are used in modern life. Some modern bacteria exclusively use right-handed amino acids.

See here for more abiogenesis info.

 

[جوري]

To save all this beating around the bush, can you explain to me why a possum would need an appendix for the reason stated but a horse or gopher doesn't? If it's purpose is to safehouse bacteria, why is it a shape that so easily becomes blocked with potentially fatal consequences?

is this pedantic syllogism? I don't especially think any reply will be satisfactory. The appendix was studied in terms of humans not animals.. who or what else possesses one, is of no consequence.. you want to deem it a useless vestigial remnant you make sure you don't show up to morning rounds in any forward institution on the account they don't inveigle moronity!

Apes don't have the same pains, they don't walk upright.

lol.. hilarious.. how would an ape complain of back pain or a headache? even in humans that is a subjective find!

We're talking about randomly generating a cell from basic components. Obviously that entails molecular biology, mathematics and biochemistry. It still doesn't change the facts that

We are not talking you are just taking up webspace on mindless drivel!

1) He's talking about assembling a functioning cell randomly from amino acids. This wouldn't happen in anyone's wildly optimistic dreams and noone has suggested it would. You're fighting an argument that isn't there.
2) It isn't random. Amino acids don't assemble randomly.

Where did the smallest functional sequence of aa come from then and what gave it the drive to carry out a particular function, for instance what wills a Chondrocyte to produce collagen, especially so in wound healing?

Reading the whole thing would numb my brain but a couple of errors on glancing over it. Like you said, "If I can't accept the parts, I won't accept the whole.."

Don't read it then, no one is holding a gun to your head, and I am not finding you particularly stimulating, I am sorry if I gave a false impression that engaging you interests me!

"the cell must be able to reproduce, and for that
the cell needs DNA (or at least RNA)." - see the cell membrane experiment thread for phospholipids that divide and grow spontaneously, or self-replicating peptides

fascinating.. so you can have phospholipids ex nihilo? let me wish those pesky micelles to form around the grease in my pot..

"For reasons that are not yet obvious, only one of these varieties (the L-variety) is actually used in present-day life forms" - p19 on left-handed and right-handed amino acids to reduce the odds on the assumption only left handed are used in modern life. Some modern bacteria exclusively use right-handed amino acids.

What does this mean?

See here for more abiogenesis info.

yeah.. we are quite familiar with atheist beliefs they are just as fantasmical as those of organized religion as dished out by pseudo intellects..

are we done here?


cheers

 

[Azy]

What's depressing is you base your beliefs on an ancient piece of paper and then expect me to trot out reams of scientific evidence in order to refute things which are clearly false and even then you will still reject it.

The appendix was studied in terms of humans not animals.. who or what else possesses one, is of no consequence.. you want to deem it a useless vestigial remnant you make sure you don't show up to morning rounds in any forward institution on the account they don't inveigle moronity!

When I had mine out a few months ago it was deemed by my surgeon to be just such a remnant.
The point was, in a world full of animals that is 'designed', why put one in human, apes, rabbits and possums, but not in other animals? If it's useful to them then why not the others, and if it isn't useful why is it there?

how would an ape complain of back pain or a headache?

Maybe I misunderstood, but what was your ape's cause for complaining?

Where did the smallest functional sequence of aa come from then and what gave it the drive to carry out a particular function...
fascinating.. so you can have phospholipids ex nihilo? let me wish those pesky micelles to form around the grease in my pot...
yeah.. we are quite familiar with atheist beliefs they are just as fantasmical as those of organized religion as dished out by pseudo intellects..
blah blah

Lets break this down
1) What has 'will' and 'drive' got to do with molecular biology. Molecules just act on each other according to their physical parameters. You're assigning some kind of anthropomorphic properties to inanimate objects.

2) You don't need RNA to replicate something, simple as that. Scoff if it makes you feel safer in your beliefs.

3) Mullan is not telling the truth about polarised amino acids. There are two types, left-handed and right-handed. You can use one or the other but not a mixture in a sequence. Mullan states all living things use left-handed aa but this is not true as some bacteria use right-handed. He does this to make the probabilities seem more remote.

4) Atheist beliefs? Being an atheist has nothing to do with abiogenesis. It might limit the possibility of the Ibrahimic garden of eden scenario, but there are an infinite number of alternate possibilities when we're talking about deities. It's just arrogant to talk of atheism just because this doesn't fit in with your version of god.
Read through that website and point out where 'beliefs' comes into it. Challenge the points as you would have me do. I doubt I'll see that happen.

 

[Dr.Trax]

9. Body hair
No doubt we were once hairier. Up until about 3 million years ago, we were covered with body hair. But by the time Homo erectus arrived, the ability to sweat meant we could shed our woolly ways.
?

FALSE!


Your Lord said to the angels, "I am going to create a human being out of clay." (Qur'an, 38:71)
Another error in evolutionary creation stems from the faulty interpretation of the above verse. Evolutionists claim that the underlined phrase above indicates a slow creation over time. However, the original Arabic makes it clear that this is a purely subjective view and entirely contradictory:
"inni khaliqun basharan min tinin" means "I am He Who created a human being out of clay."
The verse says nothing like "I am creating." In fact, the verse continues, "When I have formed him and breathed My Spirit into him, fall down in prostration to him!" It is clear from this that the verb create here takes place in a single instant.
Indeed, no Qur'anic scholar translates it as "I am creating." For instance, a Turkish Muslim scholar, Suleyman Ates's commentary reads:

The Originator of the heavens and earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, " Be" and it is.
(Qur'an, 2:117)

​

According to such peoples' interpretations, the underlined expression refers to a process, in this case an evolutionary process. Yet it does not actually refer to such a thing at all.​

 

[Azy]

If you're going to use Qur'anic passages as evidence against this then we might as well all pack up and go home. Besides I'm missing you on the other thread and you never answered my questions.

 

[جوري]

What's depressing is you base your beliefs on an ancient piece of paper and then expect me to trot out reams of scientific evidence in order to refute things which are clearly false and even then you will still reject it.

I have no expectations from you whatsoever, in fact I don't even invite such a talk with your sort. My original reply was to the OP.. but couldn't help but be amused by the imbecility along the way! You need to tweak your definition of 'evidence' in science nothing is 100% surely even you must have heard of the null hypothesis?

When I had mine out a few months ago it was deemed by my surgeon to be just such a remnant.

Yesterday I scrubbed in on an 8hr surgery, for AICD, SVC syndrome, lung ca endoscopy, and lower lobectomy, cauterized, transfused 1 units PRBC .. after the lobectomy the pt. could do just fine with what is left of the lung, (should have been there, was taken out by latest techniques using robotics.. my attending an Iranian Muslim doctor =) and named one of the top 125 docs for year 2008) the lobe that came out was not deemed a remnant in spite of its uselesness . Whatever you and your 'surgeon' agree on otherwise is really utterly inconsequential to me!

The point was, in a world full of animals that is 'designed', why put one in human, apes, rabbits and possums, but not in other animals? If it's useful to them then why not the others, and if it isn't useful why is it there?

Subscribe to some science magazine, I am sure it will keep you on top of your troubling questions---This is for the last time, as I so despise repeating myself!

Maybe I misunderstood, but what was your ape's cause for complaining?

subsclerosing panencephalitis? it is a shame for you to have 'evolved' so far and have it leave positively no impact on your frontal lobes!

Lets break this down
1) What has 'will' and 'drive' got to do with molecular biology. Molecules just act on each other according to their physical parameters. You're assigning some kind of anthropomorphic properties to inanimate objects.

No, I have not-- I don't think you understand how science works, therein lies the problem, further your replies have no relevance to what preceded, it is really very annoying!

2) You don't need RNA to replicate something, simple as that. Scoff if it makes you feel safer in your beliefs.

I love your clangorous need for humbug and quasi endeavors at sounding clever :smile:!

3) Mullan is not telling the truth about polarised amino acids. There are two types, left-handed and right-handed. You can use one or the other but not a mixture in a sequence. Mullan states all living things use left-handed aa but this is not true as some bacteria use right-handed. He does this to make the probabilities seem more remote.

Mullan discusses the probability of randomly assembling cells using the smallest number of aa-- improbable even for a virus (viruses) by the way aren't deemed living organisms, rather in need for a host to adhere, uncoat and replicate, he works that with the time it took for the first organism to have surfaced on this earth which took an approximate 1.1 billion yrs, averaged in circumstance to make living conditions favorable on this earth, and added in various number of mutations to enable us this sort of 'speciation' of course that is a very superficial of what he has actually demonstrated, but I figured I would use terms that even you can understand?

4) Atheist beliefs? Being an atheist has nothing to do with abiogenesis. It might limit the possibility of the Ibrahimic garden of eden scenario, but there are an infinite number of alternate possibilities when we're talking about deities. It's just arrogant to talk of atheism just because this doesn't fit in with your version of god.

yuppers, we have seen them all, from the dude who wanted to divide the zero (zen of zero) look him up, to FSM, spaghetti monsters to your sort-- I assure you, the day one of you comes with something scintillating will be when a pig sprouts wings and flies... but I figure the lot of you are as smart as you are educated, and mostly your education comes from turpitude!

Read through that website and point out where 'beliefs' comes into it. Challenge the points as you would have me do. I doubt I'll see that happen.

yawn!

 

[جوري]

If you're going to use Qur'anic passages as evidence against this then we might as well all pack up and go home. Besides I'm missing you on the other thread and you never answered my questions.

Is your name Hamada? I see him quoting for another Muslim member-- & indeed pretty pls pack up and crawl back from whence you came...

and lastly.. I find such great merriment in your anticipations that folks would confer dignity or sense upon your non-questions... :lol:


with that, I believe this thread has reached the end of its value..
Br. Woody if you'd do the honors

 

[Science101]

Eve,

Could you please explain why your avatar says "Account Disabled On Request" when it is obvious that it was not disabled?

And I must add that I am asking this because I have seen something like that before. Just want to see if you are doing the same thing for the same reason.

 

[NoName55]

If you're going to use Qur'anic passages as evidence against this then we might as well all pack up and go home. Besides I'm missing you on the other thread and you never answered my questions.

Please do! the sooner your preachy type goes away the quicker my type comes back to answer questions related to Islam from genuinely curious.

 

[جوري]

akhi no nammmmmmmmme... I am so happy to see you here.. al7mdlilah
Baraka Allah feek

 

[جوري]

Eve,

Could you please explain why your avatar says "Account Disabled On Request" when it is obvious that it was not disabled?

And I must add that I am asking this because I have seen something like that before. Just want to see if you are doing the same thing for the same reason.

Greetings sci.
I have no idea. I had a beautiful avi that br. Li fixed for me, and once I disabled my account it was gone, to be honest I don't recall 'un-disabling' my account, I just found out that I am an active member when I received a PM from a dear member here...

cheers

 

[Science101]

Thanks for clearing that up!

I was at first under the impression that you were banned from the forum. Then I started wondering how you could still post. Then I was wondering if you were protesting something.

Don't mind my head full of questions! Now that I know, I have other questions driving me crazy (not forum related) but at least there is one less on my mind.