Notices
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 109
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Life after death proven

  1. #1 Life after death proven 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    read www.lifeafterdeathproven.come2me.nl. Its all there.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    180
    not much there


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    just reading the following passage :

    Now I will explain how the atomic model cannot explain the beginning of life inside an egg. Every egg grows inside the lets say uterus of the bird. The bird eats randomly and the food will react with the acid in the stomach, and then the food must set course into the uterus. That can only be done if there are veins or other canals leading from stomach to uterus which can transport the food to the growing egg. So the food will randomly enter the veins and setting course towards the uterus. That food must be broken down to big molecules, that even can be already DNA molecules. That miracle of breaking food down to molecules must be done, and that is based on coincidence, because the food is processed by the acid in the stomach on coincidentally basis and by coincidence the DNA molecules must form. Let us assume that the DNA is made and then entering the egg, then what must occur to create life in an egg?

    proves to me not that there's a fault with whatever you choose to call the atomic theory, but with your understanding of how life grows from a fertilised egg

    with comprehension errors of this magnitude you'll have to forgive me for doubting the accuracy of the rest of your "proof"
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You have to read it all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    no, i don't have to
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Then you must not critisize.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Then you must not critisize.
    I have read it all. I trust that gives me the right to criticise.

    As Marnix has observed, you have close to zero knowledge of biology, zero knowledge of embryology and I find myself asking who set up your website, for I doubt you have the intellect to achieve that on your own.

    Your descriptions of what you think science thinks happens in an egg are laughable. There is nothing of value on your website. There is no argument to be taken seriously.

    May I suggest this be sent to pseudoscience very rapidly, or - if I am not mistaken - I saw a folder called Trash Can, or something similar. The concept would be at home there.
    Cogito Ergo Sum likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Then you must not critisize.
    You claim that digestion is caused by the reaction between stomach acid and food- this is untrue. If you've misunderstood such a basic process, then what hope is there that you've understood the more complex science of atomic theory?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Thats not important and does not reflect the whole idea. Read it all and go thinking.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    ok, 2nd try to get through to you :

    ... while chances to set all the molecules at the right place are infinite small. That coincidence is impossible.

    this is not coincidence, it's called chemistry
    has it occurred to you that we may have read the whole page, recognise it as the pseudo-science it is, and in the end it is you who got it all wrong ?

    maybe there's more to your idea, but it doesn't show from the link you've provided
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Moved to pseudoscience.
    /mod mode
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Thats not important and does not reflect the whole idea. Read it all and go thinking.
    I have read it all. You've misunderstood embryogenesis. Or more likely, you've never tried to learn what it is. No mention of chemical reactions beyond a link to a wikipedia article, no mention of cells, cell division, maternal RNA distribution, soluble factor concentration gradients, embryo polarisation, germ layer differentiation... essentially you treat the "egg" as a black box into which molecules must randomly enter and randomly assemble. No scientist has ever claimed that anything of the sort happens.

    To top it all off, you then assert that any evidence of embryos found in eggs is just a test by God.

    I could spend pages listing the basic scientific and logical errors you've made but what would be the point? You want to believe in an after life but you have no faith in the concept. So you've generated a convoluted story in order to silence your self-questioning. Fine by me, but please keep it to yourself because the way you're heading, externalising this stuff, is just going to make you very unhappy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by paralith
    Moved to pseudoscience.
    /mod mode
    Darnit, you moved me too. I clicked reply in Biology and I find myself in pseudoscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Darnit, you moved me too.
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    This is pretty funny so far.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    It is a fact that the molecules dont move and only can get sticked by its neighbour.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    It is a fact that the molecules dont move and only can get sticked by its neighbour.
    What does this even mean?

    Molecules move under various conditions. Pressure gradients, temperature gradients, solute gradients... so that's a rubbish claim straight out.

    And sticked? Sticked? Are you talking about chemical bonds?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    i'm afraid there's very little point in questioning Leon23 about the meaning of the words he uses - it would appear he lives in Humpty Dumpty land :

    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    First you have to know how electrons connect or disconnect in chemical reactions. That can only happen if molecules collide into eatchother and the electron moves. So are the molecules for the bones different as the ones creating the skin. So two sorts of molecules in the egg at least and both have to find a way through the egg to attach to eatchother while giving threedimensional form to the bird. Isnt that a bit coincedental. You tell me how?



    Greetings,


    Leon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Gyd
    Gyd is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    First you have to know how electrons connect or disconnect in chemical reactions. That can only happen if molecules collide into eatchother and the electron moves. So are the molecules for the bones different as the ones creating the skin. So two sorts of molecules in the egg at least and both have to find a way through the egg to attach to eatchother while giving threedimensional form to the bird. Isnt that a bit coincedental. You tell me how?



    Greetings,


    Leon
    I think Leon is on to something here.
    I personally think that we live in the
    pondering of life inside of the mind of
    G-d.
    GONE ON A LONG WALK
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyd

    I think Leon is on to something here.
    I personally think that we live in the
    pondering of life inside of the mind of
    G-d.


    Gyd is an idiot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Gyd
    Gyd is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyd

    I think Leon is on to something here.
    I personally think that we live in the
    pondering of life inside of the mind of
    G-d.


    Gyd is an idiot
    Gyd is an idiot inside the mind of G-d
    GONE ON A LONG WALK
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    First you have to know how electrons connect or disconnect in chemical reactions.
    They don't. Electrons do not connect to each other under any circumstances that I know of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    That can only happen if molecules collide into eatchother and the electron moves.
    Seriously, high school level chemistry is more specific and accurate than this. What scientific education have you had?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    So are the molecules for the bones different as the ones creating the skin.
    Bone and skin are not molecular substances. There's no "bone molecule" or "skin molecule". Both are composed of cells (which are themselves composed of molecules that are a mixture of carbon, hydrogen and lots of other molecules). What sets them apart is the pattern of gene expression in each. Bone cells, for example, produce a matrix of protein which they secrete around them. Eventually they're trapped in that matrix and it becomes mineralised into bone.

    So the molecules aren't just randomly drifting around and turning into different tissues. It's much more complex and much more controlled than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    So two sorts of molecules in the egg at least and both have to find a way through the egg to attach to eatchother while giving threedimensional form to the bird. Isnt that a bit coincedental. You tell me how?
    It's been many years since I learned this stuff, but I'll try to outline it.

    Typically the first cell of an embryo has a chemical gradient of some sort which defines "up" in the cell. The first cell divides along a line at right angles to that. That up/down axis is the starting point for more chemical gradients in the embryo. As more and more cell division happens, the cells begin to differentiate into basic tissue types based on their rough location relative to that up/down axis which has become more complex (the various gradients allow the cells to know their three dimensional location). And once the tissues begin to generate, they essentially grow from that point using the same method of gradient/axis, giving ever more complex location information.

    The first few gradients is defined by the mother, but the subsequent ones are defined by patterns of gene expression in the embryo.

    More detail and links here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryogenesis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Forget what science says. They are wrong. Possible reality can also be that we might live inside thoughts of God. There is only molecules in the egg and they can only attach to other molecules i was tought. So molecules must attach in order to build a bird.

    Lets suppose that cells must be made first in the egg, then molecules must FIND eatchother to attach to other molecules that will build a cell. Those molecules can only put layers of molecules to the core of the cell. You can think of another way to make a cell? Do the molecules come from the inside of the cell? Cannot be, so first a core of molecules can find eatchother in the egg and layers of molecules can be added to continue building the cell. Think bigtime and enlarge the molecules (of the cells). The cell could maybe be made by attaching (only) neighbour molecules, but then it reaches the growth at which the cell wants to split. How can we explain that? There can only be molecules leaving the cell and those have to stay put and wait for the right molecules that will attach. The cell can break in two and again it has to wait for molecules, but more then that cannot happen. How do you discribe a cell splitting if it only exists out of stupid molecules. I can tell you no molecules can make everytime a perfect bird.

    Now need the bones other cells and so the skin and the vein system, the heart and the brain the eyes and the ear. The exact molecules building an eyecel must go to the place of the eye. So for the braincells, the right molecules must rush to the brain. So for the threedimensional bonestructure and threedimensional vein system and three dimensional organs. All right molecules for right organs or else must go to the RIGHT places or already be at the right places and what a coincedence it is that the molecules are placed perfectly right at the right place.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Forget what science says. They are wrong. Possible reality can also be that we might live inside thoughts of God. There is only molecules in the egg and they can only attach to other molecules i was tought. So molecules must attach in order to build a bird.

    Lets suppose that cells must be made first in the egg, then molecules must FIND eatchother to attach to other molecules that will build a cell. Those molecules can only put layers of molecules to the core of the cell. You can think of another way to make a cell? Do the molecules come from the inside of the cell? Cannot be, so first a core of molecules can find eatchother in the egg and layers of molecules can be added to continue building the cell. Think bigtime and enlarge the molecules (of the cells). The cell could maybe be made by attaching (only) neighbour molecules, but then it reaches the growth at which the cell wants to split. How can we explain that? There can only be molecules leaving the cell and those have to stay put and wait for the right molecules that will attach. The cell can break in two and again it has to wait for molecules, but more then that cannot happen. How do you discribe a cell splitting if it only exists out of stupid molecules. I can tell you no molecules can make everytime a perfect bird.

    Now need the bones other cells and so the skin and the vein system, the heart and the brain the eyes and the ear. The exact molecules building an eyecel must go to the place of the eye. So for the braincells, the right molecules must rush to the brain. So for the threedimensional bonestructure and threedimensional vein system and three dimensional organs. All right molecules for right organs or else must go to the RIGHT places or already be at the right places and what a coincedence it is that the molecules are placed perfectly right at the right place.
    Poppycock!

    This is a SCIENCE BASED forum. Provide us with scientific proof of your assertions and then we will talk.

    On the other hand, continue completely ignoring the comments and scientific information provided by others and this thread with be locked.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Forget what science says. They are wrong.
    But they can back up what they're saying with evidence. They can show us an embryo forming just as I have described. If you want to dismiss that, you need to show us evidence that contradicts the current model.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Possible reality can also be that we might live inside thoughts of God.
    There are an infinite number of "possible" realities. We could all be made out of cheese. How do we distinguish the likely from the unlikely? Evidence. You use evidence all the time in your every day life. You know not to put your hand in a fire. You know that leaving your house through the front door is better than leaving through an upstairs window. This is all based on observation of the world around you, some direct and some indirect. Evidence. To claim these things as untrue would need more evidence to the contrary.

    So why dismiss evidence in more complex situations? It's just observation, after all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    There is only molecules in the egg and they can only attach to other molecules i was tought. So molecules must attach in order to build a bird.
    You were taught something that contradicts simple observation. So you need to show us why we are wrong using evidence, not tell us that we are wrong as if it is a fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You have a point. Evidence. Do we have simulated imaging about how the atoms move through the egg looking for the right molcueles to connect? We just need more information about the possibilities the atomic theorie offers us. Its also just a theorie. What can they do in an egg, that is perfectly understood we know how molecules connect in theorie, we can predict then the movement of the molecules. So they dont move a lot. Shouldnt they just lay at the perfect spots?

    In the beginning there was no life. Atoms made molecules in seas. Molecules made clusters of molecules that only can grow bigger, by attaching more molecules. Molecules can fall of waiting to bump into other molecules again. But the cluster molecules became life. There the chemical reaction of life happend. But no chemical reactions can build my system of my eyes, system of my brain,system of my ears (with all the mechanics and the hearing nerve with its own system), system of my heart and veins, the whole needed organs just all there by chemical reations. Build by chemical reactions we are. Or not?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You have a point. Evidence. Do we have simulated imaging about how the atoms move through the egg looking for the right molcueles to connect?
    We have actual electron microscope images of atoms and molecules. Direct images, not simulations. As for the egg/embryo we have direct images of the cells and how the come together.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    We just need more information about the possibilities the atomic theorie offers us.
    What makes you think thousands of scientists have not already researched this heavily? All observations to date agree with the atomic theory of matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Its also just a theorie.
    In science, "theory" does not mean what people normally mean by it. It does not mean conjecture, speculation, educated guess or hypothesis. Theories are the models that heavily tested, the ones that we are most sure of, the ones we consider to represent fact. The ideas that are not tested are called hypotheses.

    Atomic theory is not "just a theory", because in science that statement is as much nonsense as calling something "mere tested fact".

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    What can they do in an egg, that is perfectly understood we know how molecules connect in theorie, we can predict then the movement of the molecules. So they dont move a lot. Shouldnt they just lay at the perfect spots?
    The piece of the puzzle you keep missing is the cell. Cells, controlled by DNA and responses to environment, are what ensure that the embryo is constructed properly. It's not random.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    In the beginning there was no life. Atoms made molecules in seas. Molecules made clusters of molecules that only can grow bigger, by attaching more molecules. Molecules can fall of waiting to bump into other molecules again. But the cluster molecules became life.
    Very roughly correct, though you're still taking a very simple view of chemical reactions. Some molecular structures became self-replicating and eventually became cells, a process we call abiogenesis. But this is life from non-life. It is not at all comparable to embryogenesis, which is life from life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    There the chemical reaction of life happend. But no chemical reactions can build my system of my eyes, system of my brain,system of my ears (with all the mechanics and the hearing nerve with its own system), system of my heart and veins, the whole needed organs just all there by chemical reations. Build by chemical reactions we are. Or not?
    We are, but not simple chemical reactions, self-replicating ones packaged in cells. You're over-simplifying to the point of making your hypothesis meaningless. You need to know a whole lot more about chemistry and biology before you an effectively argue this position of yours. And you need a better grasp of how you build a hypothesis and most importantly, test it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    How did the bird grow under the microscope? Can they explain me? What molecules stick to which and form a bird. What we see cant be true or is just a simulated thought of God. He simulates and is smarter then science and humankind.

    So the molecules in the egg move indeed to form the cells? Molecuul attach to another, those to another and more than sticking together they cannot. Molecules stick just together or not. Just stick together so... Are those molecules placed right and follow they there course very coincedentily through the egg to form the birdie?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    ...What we see cant be true or is just a simulated thought of God. ..
    what's the point of continuing this discussion if from the outset you've decided what is and isn't true, never mind what has been observed ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    What molecules stick to which and form a bird.
    It's not a random molecular mixture, it's controlled by cells.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    What we see cant be true or is just a simulated thought of God.
    You trust your eyes for every day events. Why not trust experiments which show that embryos grow from cells? Why assume you're being tricked? What reason do you have to assume that it's not exactly as it appears?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    He simulates and is smarter then science and humankind.
    That's a faith-based statement. Not a scientific one. It has no place in a "proof", if there is such a thing in science.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    So the molecules in the egg move indeed to form the cells?
    The egg is a cell. The first cell. It uses molecules to form new cells. It's not an undirected process. It is first formed when a sperm cell and ovum cell fuse. This is also called a zygote.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Molecuul attach to another, those to another and more than sticking together they cannot. Molecules stick just together or not. Just stick together so... Are those molecules placed right and follow they there course very coincedentily through the egg to form the birdie?
    In cell formation, they're attached together under the control of the cell's DNA.

    I'd suggest you get a good high school biology book and do some reading. This will explain things much better than I can.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    I'd suggest you get a good high school biology book and do some reading. This will explain things much better than I can.
    then again, Leon23 has already made up his mind that there's no point in studying science
    in his own words : "Forget what science says. They are wrong." - he somehow has received a revelation telling him that science is wrong, so he doesn't have to study it
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    I'd suggest you get a good high school biology book and do some reading. This will explain things much better than I can.
    then again, Leon23 has already made up his mind that there's no point in studying science
    in his own words : "Forget what science says. They are wrong." - he somehow has received a revelation telling him that science is wrong, so he doesn't have to study it
    You may be right, and maybe you think I'm wasting my time. But what I'm trying to get across to him is that he doesn't know much about what he's rejecting, nor exactly why he's rejecting it. If a person wants to disregard evidence and testing as a way of understanding the world then why trust any of it? Why demand that cars be safety tested? Why trust the evidence that jumping off a third story balcony is dangerous?

    The only difference is that some kinds of evidence are less direct or are harder to understand than others. But no less valid for that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Place the perfect cells in the egg for example eye's ears bones, just out of atoms existing cells must be placed exactly right. Or the cells have to move through the egg to find the right places? Or have the cells still to be built yet? What are the answers?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Place the perfect cells in the egg for example eye's ears bones, just out of atoms existing cells must be placed exactly right. Or the cells have to move through the egg to find the right places? Or have the cells still to be built yet? What are the answers?
    Cells can move. They can do this under their own power, typically by sticking to other cells and rolling along them. But initially, the cells just divide and stay next to each other. They begin to change into cells of different tissues depending on where they are located relative to the cell mass.

    Find a Biology book, learn about embryogenesis!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Forget what science says. They are wrong.
    If we are to forget what science says, then we would have to ask what it is you base your assertions, if not science?
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    If cells move, then are they clusters of atoms that move. I dont think the clusters of atoms move by meaning, that is based on coincedence. And before the cells were made there was a chaos of molecules and that chaos of molecules must form the right cells at the right places. A bit coincedentally dont you think?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    If cells move, then are they clusters of atoms that move.
    The same could be said of any object capable of movement. It is too reductionist to state that a cell is a cluster of atoms that move because it suggests that they are not organised. They are organised.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    I dont think the clusters of atoms move by meaning, that is based on coincedence.
    You don't think? What do you know and how do you know it? This is a simple question that people seem to have no problem answering in everyday life. But it's no different in science. You need evidence to know things. Show me evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    And before the cells were made there was a chaos of molecules and that chaos of molecules must form the right cells at the right places.
    No, that is not what happens. Atoms naturally form certain molecules under certain conditions. Carbon rings and the like. These are all over the place. The first cell of an organism is not formed from a mixture of atoms but from a cell from each parent fusing. That cell then makes use of the molecule supplied to is to build more cells. Like a builder using blocks and cement. The other cells aren't formed by chance, they're built by other cells.

    The only point at which the event you are describing should have happened is with the very first cell ever. After that it has just been cells making other cells. So your target should not be embryogenesis or any other form of biogenesis, but instead be abiogenesis. The first emergence of a cell from that mixture of molecules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    A bit coincedentally dont you think?
    No more coincidental than a house built by a builder. He knows what he's doing, and so do your cells.

    So, to repeat the question that all scientists must answer:

    What do you know and how do you know it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You want proof then lets go back to the atomic theorie. They say elektrons connect. Elektrons are the only moving parts in the egg, or maybe some atomic cores that are pulled down by gravity. And all elektrons are circeling and connecting if circumstances are right to can the connection be made. That means that two atomic cores out oftwo molecules must ''touch'' eachother by letting the attracting power of the two cores do the rest. Biology means to know about chemistry. Chemistry is written in theorie and the theorie says, only elektrons move and connect. And now let your mind do the simulation. Build the bird while only elektrons are moving! Get it?



    Greetings


    Leon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You want proof then lets go back to the atomic theorie. They say elektrons connect. Elektrons are the only moving parts in the egg, or maybe some atomic cores that are pulled down by gravity. And all elektrons are circeling and connecting if circumstances are right to can the connection be made. That means that two atomic cores out oftwo molecules must ''touch'' eachother by letting the attracting power of the two cores do the rest. Biology means to know about chemistry. Chemistry is written in theorie and the theorie says, only elektrons move and connect. And now let your mind do the simulation. Build the bird while only elektrons are moving! Get it?



    Greetings


    Leon
    Leon, you have no idea how chemistry works. The entire thread is testament to it. You don't even seem to have high school level knowledge. That being obvious, most of the people replying to you have actually studied these things, at least as part of their tertiary curriculums. Maybe you should rather listen to what they are saying instead of trying to argue with them.

    Wikipedia is your friend.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You want proof then lets go back to the atomic theorie. They say elektrons connect. Elektrons are the only moving parts in the egg, or maybe some atomic cores that are pulled down by gravity.
    First, there is no "proof" in science. There is evidence. Proof is for Law and Mathematics. Second, pure electrons are not a moving part of the contents of an egg at all. Third, atomic cores is a meaningless term.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    And all elektrons are circeling and connecting if circumstances are right to can the connection be made. That means that two atomic cores out oftwo molecules must ''touch'' eachother by letting the attracting power of the two cores do the rest.
    Very roughly this is how atoms associate, though your specifics are very much wrong. This has little to do with what happens inside an egg since the atoms and molecules used are being manipulated by cells.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Biology means to know about chemistry.
    You could also reduce it to very complex physics, but would that be useful when talking about a cellular and molecular system? Not really.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Chemistry is written in theorie and the theorie says, only elektrons move and connect.
    What theory says that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    And now let your mind do the simulation. Build the bird while only elektrons are moving! Get it?
    No. Do you?

    Last time, I asked you for some evidence. You have responded by pointing to a theory. You've gotten the theory wrong and even if you hadn't it would not be evidence in support of your position. What observations have you made which back up the claims you're making or which contradict the normal ideas on how things work?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Of course does all biology have their roots in chemistry. It are molecules attatching together making molecules. Molecules attaching together making cells.

    The atomic theory says that only the electrons move. And those are the connecting elements of all atoms. So where we have to focus on is how does all electrons fix the whole bird. The only ones moving in the egg are the electrons. They can make changes. But the electron does not reach very far. It is therefor logics that the atomic cores must be placed right to let the electrons do the connection. Thats biology explained with chemistry. You must know about the atomic theory and then you can solve the puzzel. What we see under microscopes cannot be true, because God simulates the proces. He rather be on the background, but He cannot hide from me. God likes surprises and let me do the talkin.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    What we see under microscopes cannot be true, because God simulates the proces.He rather be on the background, but He cannot hide from me. God likes surprises and let me do the talkin.
    And you have just crossed the threshold into the trash bin if I had anything to say about it.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Of course does all biology have their roots in chemistry. It are molecules attatching together making molecules. Molecules attaching together making cells.

    The atomic theory says that only the electrons move. And those are the connecting elements of all atoms. So where we have to focus on is how does all electrons fix the whole bird. The only ones moving in the egg are the electrons. They can make changes. But the electron does not reach very far. It is therefor logics that the atomic cores must be placed right to let the electrons do the connection. Thats biology explained with chemistry. You must know about the atomic theory and then you can solve the puzzel. What we see under microscopes cannot be true, because God simulates the proces. He rather be on the background, but He cannot hide from me. God likes surprises and let me do the talkin.
    I've already told you that you're not making any sense and now you're just repeating the same thing over and over. You're talking about logical extensions of a theory that you clearly haven't studied and don't yet understand. You're providing no new observations. You're invoking the supernatural to fill in gaps in a theory that doesn't even exist as you understand it. You talk about these things as if they are simple fact, but you're not showing me why I should believe you. The question I keep asking and which keeps going unanswered is:

    How do you know?

    Until you answer that question, we're pretty much done with this discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    How does molecules connect? Thats answer is crucial to our understanding of the whole proces that could happen inside an egg.

    There is still no proof, because they never saw a whole bird come into existance under a microscope. Maybe they can watch a cell form. But that cell must have the right molecules put on the right places and then the electrons can make the connections. Thats simple logics.

    For the whole bird must every molecuul be placed right to form the cells. Then the cells go moving or not. But isnt it a bit coincidental that the cells are placed on the right spots to fix the threedimensional veinsystem, bonestructure, skin, organs, eyes etc. The cells could have been everywhere. And a moving cell is uncapable to move knowing that its only a cluster of atoms bumping into other surrounding clusters (cells) of atoms.

    And first of all, the molecules before the cells are formed must be placed exactly right. That coincidence is ridiculous.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    When I came to this site I was a little dismayed by the rudeness of some of the posters. They seemed to lack tolerance for those who lacked the education or the insight to understand particular theories, or concepts.

    I now fully appreciate why that rudeness, for those individuals, seemed the only effective way of dealing with the frustration caused by the determined resistance to learning that some posters display.

    Leon23,

    are you listening to anything that anyone is saying? It seems not.

    Please listen now.

    You ask, "How does molecules connect?"
    I answer: the DNA in the egg's genes direct the assembly of molecules. The activity and inactivity of particular genes is dictated by the chemical gradients, the behaviour of adjacent cells, the actions of other genes, and like matters.

    You ask, "But isnt it a bit coincidental that the cells are placed on the right spots to fix the threedimensional veinsystem, bonestructure, skin, organs, eyes etc. "

    I answer: no it is not at all coincidental. It is the result of an extremely complex interplay of biochemistry, genetic control, epigenetic effects, etc. There is nothing coincidental about it.

    Now let me ask you a question. (OK, more than one question, but they are all related.) What makes you believe that you are correct, yet thousands, ten of thousands, hundreds of thousands of scientists are wrong?
    What gives you the incredible arrogance, the mind numbing self righteousness to believe you are right, but they are wrong?
    What gives you the strength to indulge your stupidity and ignorance to the degree that you have done on this thread? What, indeed, gives you the right to behave like a complete numbskull?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    There is still no proof, because they never saw a whole bird come into existance under a microscope. Maybe they can watch a cell form. But that cell must have the right molecules put on the right places and then the electrons can make the connections. Thats simple logics.
    Yes, we've watched the first cell form. It doesn't form out of a soup of molecules, it forms out of the fusion of two other cells. We've even done it ourselves, that's what IVF is. And we've watched embryos form under microscopes. You can get videos of the cell division on the internet. We've got ultrasounds and x-rays of every step imaginable. We can watch the whole damn thing and we now KNOW how it works from start to finish. There's no mystery in embryogenesis, there's no unknowns or coincidences or magic. It's not cutting edge science, it's been fully understood for ages. On a biological level and a chemical level. Open a biology book and read it.

    If you're not willing to learn then you're just deluding yourself and wasting your time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista

    If you're not willing to learn then you're just deluding yourself and wasting your time.
    and so we reveal yet another obvious candidate for a thread with an agenda and no intent to learn or teach, just to preach.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Why scientists never discovered the truth is because God is simulating every part of the world and its life. We live in a fantasy, a thought of God. And in a fantasy not everything can be logical. That gaps in the fantasy i have discovered. It is not logical.

    Fact is that molecules, the right ones for the bones veins, brain, eyes etc. must be placed at the right spots in the egg. Then the right cells can be produced at the right spots in the egg. Every cell must be placed right. No veins can be placed where the bones must be etc. So all the moelcules in the cell must be placed right. And that is unbelievable coincidence, because the heart cells could be placed in the brain, the bone cells at the skin etc. Those chances are possible, so why dont we ever find a bird with a heart in his head and why everytime the molecules are placed exactly right?

    Question yourself. I am little smart, because i understand it. You guys are not that clever. I need recognizion, cauze then i can buy me all the dope in the world. My life is without smile. I have no future. Only death laughs with me. Its about to end. Maybe if i can sell my book, then i can be happy with a future full of drugs. So please help me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Why scientists never discovered the truth is because God is simulating every part of the world and its life. We live in a fantasy, a thought of God. And in a fantasy not everything can be logical. That gaps in the fantasy i have discovered. It is not logical.
    this is what is called "moving the goal posts" - first you say there is no evidence to show how embryogenesis works, but when it turns out there is (plenty of) evidence anyway, you change your story into "it's all a con anyway"
    is this all god means to you ? the master deceiver ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Those chances are possible, so why dont we ever find a bird with a heart in his head and why everytime the molecules are placed exactly right?
    in answer to your question why we don't find creatures where embryogenesis has gone wrong : occasionally we do, but most of the time, they end up dead before or shortly after birth
    it's called natural selection, anything that doesn't produce a viable end result ends up in the wastebin of evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    I am little smart, because i understand it. You guys are not that clever. I need recognizion, cauze then i can buy me all the dope in the world. My life is without smile. I have no future. Only death laughs with me. Its about to end. Maybe if i can sell my book, then i can be happy with a future full of drugs. So please help me.
    so we have to take your word for it, just because we feel sorry for you ? if you're this smart, why aren't you clever enough to make your life happier ? or to realise that depending on drugs for your happiness is neither smart nor clever ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Why scientists never discovered the truth is because God is simulating every part of the world and its life. We live in a fantasy, a thought of God. And in a fantasy not everything can be logical. That gaps in the fantasy i have discovered. It is not logical.
    You haven't discovered any gaps, because you merely haven't looked. You haven't done any observations or tests to determine if things don't add up. You're just thinking your way through it with no information. And if those gaps of yours were really there, doesn't that make your God a being that makes mistakes? One that can't fool one simple human?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Fact is that molecules, the right ones for the bones veins, brain, eyes etc. must be placed at the right spots in the egg. Then the right cells can be produced at the right spots in the egg. Every cell must be placed right. No veins can be placed where the bones must be etc. So all the moelcules in the cell must be placed right. And that is unbelievable coincidence, because the heart cells could be placed in the brain, the bone cells at the skin etc. Those chances are possible, so why dont we ever find a bird with a heart in his head and why everytime the molecules are placed exactly right?
    Completely wrong. For the 10th or so time, embryos are not constructed by placement of molecules. You've been given all the information you need to start to understand this, but you'd rather ignore the evidence and assume you're right. That is the main reason why your ideas aren't accepted on the science forums.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Question yourself.
    Most of us are practising scientists, we question ourselves as a part of our jobs every day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    I am little smart, because i understand it. You guys are not that clever.
    Sorry to say this fella, but it does not appear that you're clever enough to grasp how much you don't know.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    I need recognizion, cauze then i can buy me all the dope in the world. My life is without smile. I have no future. Only death laughs with me. Its about to end. Maybe if i can sell my book, then i can be happy with a future full of drugs. So please help me.
    If you want money, you're in the wrong business. Even very good scientists are not rich. Science writers are not rich. Only a tiny percentage of either group hits the big time and they don't do it by writing a 1000-word "theory" and smoking dope..

    We can't help you gain recognition, we can only help you see where you're going wrong. If you're willing to listen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    God indeed is a Masterdeceiver. And Biologista. Molecules must be placed right for the tenth or so times. Imagine those are already cells, dont they have to be placed right? Answer the question.


    And there's more i will show you a link to more evidence which show us life after death. Just one min i will edit this post and add the link. Just a sec. Here http://www.thescienceforum.com/viewt...=169543#169543


    Greetings,


    Leon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54 Life after death proven (2) 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    My first prove i deliver here http://lifeafterdeathproven.come2me.nl.

    My second one is the following. As we know we have muscles, that are mechinical. How can we move a muscle with willpower? First there is a thought and then we move the muscle. But in order to move mechanics, somethink psysical must be triggered. We only exist out of elektrons and atomic cores, so one of those must set the muscle to action. Is it then a beam of elektrons we move with willpower? Or atoms, or molecules? No we cannot move elektrons with willpower nor atoms or molecules, so the mechanics in the musclecells stay unmoved, cauze nothing changed. Nothing has changed.

    Im in search of someone with great knowledge over chemistry and physics in order to write a book with my help. I can prove life after death. So if ayone can help me thanx.


    Greetings


    Leon.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    792
    I'm sorry but you're way off with all of that; I read the link.

    Now I will explain how the atomic model cannot explain the beginning of life inside an egg.
    doing this is a bit like trying to use germ theory to explain the orbit of the moon! You just dont do it; you're dealing with 2 totally different concepts.

    If you're talking about the continuity of chemical reactions; of course that occurs; but that is not to do with what we deam as life.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    It has all to do with chemical reactions. Atoms make molecules, make cells, make bodyparts, make bird


    What about muscle movement?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    look, Leon23, you already had one similar thread sent to pseudoland and another to trash

    have a guess where this thread is going to end up as soon as paralith sees it ? my money is on the deleted threads
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Which system on atomic level does muscles move? There cannot be a system. It is God that moves us, cauze He is us. He knows what He wants to move.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Which system on atomic level does muscles move? There cannot be a system. It is God that moves us, cauze He is us. He knows what He wants to move.
    The instant you invoke something that is either undefined or untestable to plug a gap in your knowledge, the whole thing stops being science. Until you get that into your head you're just never going to understand why your threads keep getting thrown off the real science forums.

    See you in pseudoscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You must build a system out of electrons and atoms or molecules is that so hard?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Leon, stop posting these threads in the Biology forum. If you continue to give moderator decisions the run around you may be suspended. Moved to pseudoscience.
    /moderator mode
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by paralith
    Leon, stop posting these threads in the Biology forum. If you continue to give moderator decisions the run around you may be suspended. Moved to pseudoscience.
    /moderator mode
    paralith, i'm disappointed - now i've lost my bet at Ladbrokes ! i had 5 on it being trash or deleted rather than pseudo
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    sorry marnix. I'll give you an insider tip! This is his last warning - any further postings on this topic in bio are definitely going to the trash.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You must build a system out of electrons and atoms or molecules is that so hard?
    Why stop there? Atoms must be built out of protons, neutrons and electrons. In your view they must do so entirely randomly without any rules. The bit you're missing is called "the laws of physics".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Masters Degree Numsgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    708
    Cells are made of molecules, so in the sense that cells have to be properly placed in an embryo the molecules do, too. However, there's a great deal of wiggle room in the exact placement of each and every molecule. Things don't have to be 100% exact. Same way that if you make a chair all the molecules in the chair don't have to be 100% correct. Most life forms are extremely robust to changes. I've seen birds surviving pretty well with only a single leg, for instance. If you can lose a leg and still function, it should be obvious that you can have a few misplaced molecules and not suddenly die.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Numsgil
    Cells are made of molecules, so in the sense that cells have to be properly placed in an embryo the molecules do, too. However, there's a great deal of wiggle room in the exact placement of each and every molecule. Things don't have to be 100% exact. Same way that if you make a chair all the molecules in the chair don't have to be 100% correct. Most life forms are extremely robust to changes. I've seen birds surviving pretty well with only a single leg, for instance. If you can lose a leg and still function, it should be obvious that you can have a few misplaced molecules and not suddenly die.
    Yes, but Leon is under the impression that the embryo is a system of free molecules which must each be placed in the correct location. When you bring it to the cellular level and explain it in those terms he just covers his ears.

    I think this thread is going in very small circles and serves no particular value.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    But the molecules build the cells and the cells cannot wiggle. Those must be placed right in the right threedimensional shapes. So must the bonestructure have their cells placed on the places the 3D skelleton must be formed. Same for the skin, veinsystem, braincells, musclecells, eyecells, earsystem, etc. That is based on tremendous coincidence, because the chicken eats randomly different molecules.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Cauze the system is mechanical. If no elektron is being moved (from the brain or elsewhere), the musclecell will not move, cauze everything stays the same in the musclecell. Can we move electrons?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    But the molecules build the cells and the cells cannot wiggle.
    says who ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    if quantum mechanics has taught us anything, it's that classic mechanics is not the way to think about what happens at the subatomic level
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    movement of molecules doesnt happen on subatomic level. The musclecell must be moved by a signal. Only signals that can be used are the elektrons, cauze more then elektrons and atomic cores isnt there in a human body.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    you think cells push against eachother to find a good place?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    i'm just saying that you're wrong trying to apply classic mechanics to electrons
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    you think cells push against eachother to find a good place?
    The first cell has a chemical gradient (set at some point during fusion) that determines the up/down axis. The exact orientation is not important, it is only important that the gradients which follow are accurate relative to it. Others gradients, based on that first axis, determine left/right and z-axes. After that, yet more gradients define a 3d "grid" based on these axes. This is all just gradients of different chemical signals which trigger responses in new cells.

    Some cells move in response to chemical gradients. But mostly they also use the gradient "grid" to sense their location and they change into cells of different tissue types.

    This is a pretty broad explanation, I recommend once again that you do some reading on the matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    But the molecules build the cells and the cells cannot wiggle.
    Of course they can. Even when you're fully formed you have billions of cells capable of movement. When you're an embryo, things are much more fluid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    you just seem to preclude various possibilities out of hand, without even considering whether the dismissal is justified
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR
    you just seem to preclude various possibilities out of hand, without even considering whether the dismissal is justified
    He doesn't like evidence much either. This is going nowhere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You guys dont understand. What we see is a simulation of life. God thinks nature and birth. He thinks a laws of nature. The only thing you can trust is your brain.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    What more has the power to move?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You guys dont understand. What we see is a simulation of life. God thinks nature and birth. He thinks a laws of nature. The only thing you can trust is your brain.
    Assuming this is true, you could just as easily be as totally wrong as the rest of us. If the universe is that arbitrary, it's evidence of nothing at all other than that it's arbitrary. And none of that proves that there's a God, that this God is anything like the one you claim it is, or that there's an after life.

    These things do not logically follow each other. You are lost primarily in you total lack of knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics, a dogmatic assumption that what your dope-addled brain believes to be right is right and a total unwillingness even to ask the question of yourself; "Am I really right and if so, why?"

    This thread should be locked. It's beyond pseudoscience and into insanity now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    What more has the power to move?
    All matter?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    movement of molecules doesnt happen on subatomic level. The musclecell must be moved by a signal. Only signals that can be used are the elektrons, cauze more then elektrons and atomic cores isnt there in a human body.
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...-impulses.html
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    musclecells must pull together, if nothing happens the molecules in the cell stay unmoved.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Biology is also simulation. You are idiot to believe science is right. Explain the proces to me then and let me ask you first how does molecules click together? Explain that?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    molecules in a cell ALWAYS move - in fact i'd go as far as saying that the inside of a cell is all frenetic activity of RNA, enzymes, proteins etc.etc. - even if the cell wall does not move at all

    the movement of chemicals inside the cell does not necessarily result in the movement of the cell itself
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    however, this being a science forum, the majority of us assume as the default position that science, when applied correctly, is capable of telling us something worthwhile about the world around us

    i think you'll find yourself in a minority of 1 when you start calling the rest of us idiots, especially since many have already been very patient in trying to explain to you how molecules and cells behave during embryogenesis - the fact that you don't understand the explanations or fail to accept them is insufficient grounds for calling everyone else idiots
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Biology is also simulation.
    How do you know? We keep asking and you keep telling us about electrons. Doesn't cut it. Evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    You are idiot to believe science is right.
    Is that so? I'll ask you not to insult me please. Science seems to work for pretty much everything else. It just relies on what we observe. It's the system of understanding that has allowed you ultimately to post on an internet forum. Why is it idiotic to use that method when it has yet to fail us?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    Explain the proces to me then and let me ask you first how does molecules click together? Explain that?
    How molecules "click together"? They don't. They're not lego bricks, they're molecules. Haven't we been through this? Over and over. We tell you how it works and you say it isn't so. We say show us evidence and you tell us the same thing again.

    They form bonds in many different ways including covalent, polar covalent and ionic bonding between constituent atoms, and then intermolecular bonds such as hydrogen bonds. These bonds can form in all sorts of conditions and cells can manipulate the reactions required to build new cells etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Please end this nonsense now.

    Pretty please.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    You dont understand. Have you ever drawn two atomic cores which both have fields that keeps a distance between the cores and in between the electrons circle. When do they connect? Obviously when the cores reach the distance that the elektron will be attracted by the other core. That coincidence of cores approaching eatchother makes the bird. That coincidence you must know now. It must be a thought of God.

    And there's a fault in the atomic theorie. I will make it known on this forum. Tell me where i can put a fault in the atomic theorie? In chemie? There's a fault in i can explain so the whole atomic theorie falls apart. What we see cannot always be true in a thought of God. There are already images of atoms, but you will see the theorie is mistaken. Atoms cant be true.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    maybe you should show where atomic theory goes wrong before trying to elaborate on the consequences of it being wrong

    i'd say the physics or chemistry subforum are the most obvious places, but if your arguments of why atomic theory is wrong are at the same level as your knowledge of embryology, no doubt whatever thread you decide to start there is likely to bounce back to pseudo-science

    good luck with it anyway
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    I will tell where it goes wrong. Tommorow i will speak. Now im hazy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    What of the classical mechanics of the whole mechanical muslesystem does move by willpower? Shoudnt be that the elektrons, cauze they are the only witch can be moved?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    are you honestly saying that our muscles move purely because of electron movement ?????
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    How can you bring atoms together in a musclecell. No options are there. The only option is also impossible, but those are the moving electrons that can make a difference in a musclecell.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    dude, you have serious misconceptions about how atoms join to form molecules, and how molecules behave within cells - sort those out first and then we can talk

    your impossibilities only exist in your head, the rest of the world doesn't see them
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,200
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    How can you bring atoms together in a musclecell. No options are there. The only option is also impossible, but those are the moving electrons that can make a difference in a musclecell.
    http://www.wisc-online.com/objects/i...p?objID=AP2904
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Leon23's problem isn't simply technical. It's a larger problem we all have in some areas.

    Leon23 the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Dunes are more than just sand grains. Biology isn't just chemistry.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    biology is atoms and molecules click togheter. Muscle move with force. What create the force?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  99. #98  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Im still hazy today, yea you know the weed. So i talk later about the faults. You gonna give me right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  100. #99  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    You think God wants you to smoke weed? Just look at what it is doing to you. He made a fantastic machine that is capable of churning all of us out all by itself and you reduce it to His thoughts. Way to go. Take a good hard look at yourself buddy. He did not give you a brain to think and feel with just so you can haze it up with weed and become a drain on society. Have some courage. Go and talk to a priest or another religious leader. Don't give up. You can do it!
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  101. #100  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    biology is atoms and molecules click togheter. Muscle move with force. What create the force?
    That's already been explained to you in a link above.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •