Natural Selection in it's simplest form: All creatures should eventually die off except that species which is superior to all others.
Abiogenesis in it's simplest form: Chemicals are living things. They are the dominant species on the Earth. All chemicals should dissapear excelt the one that is superior to all others.
50 comments
Yes, chemicals are living things! They talk to each other.... here's what you do.... take a half jug of ammonia and fill the rest of the jug with bleach and sniff it ;)
Natural Selection: furthering of positive traits in a species, removal of negative traits. ALL creatures are not evolving into ONE creature. Creatures are changing into MORE creatures to better exist in their respective environments.
I don't have a very good technical understanding of abiogenesis, but i do know that you are without a doubt wrong.
Your use of the apostrophe in the possessive 'its' demonstrates clearly that you are not among the superior species. Amd your inability to spell disappear and except marks you down as a non-survivor.
Furthermore, chemicals are not living things. And you are wrong about everything else. Get an education before you argue with me.
fergus
By 'simplest form' you mean the only way your pathetic little homeschooled mind can comprehend.
Which, of course, means it's completely wrong.
Jack of all trades - master of none.
For one species to replace all others it would need to either be so adaptable in its current form as to out-compete everything else thrown up by nature, including the 'specialists, or capable of changing other environments to fit with its requirements, hence disadvantaging the rest.
Humans partially qualify on both counts; we use our brains and tools to be better flyers than birds, better hunters than lions, better foragers than mice, etc. And we clear forests, create irrigation works, farm monocultures and so on to our benefit and other species detriment.
Despite being reliant on other species of plant and animal (for now), and not having found a way to eradicate all the pests and diseases that bother us (for now), we're not doing so bad at killing off all other 'inferior' species as it is.
Evolution is NOT like The Highlander ; it's not a case of "There Can Be Only One." For one thing, what would that one remaining species eat? Rocks?
Oh, and the extension of the same principle to chemistry has to be the weirdest strawman extrapolation of a strawman of evolutionary theory that I have ever seen.
Except that is only true for each and every little environmental niche, and, even then, if two or more species compete equally in a niche there is no reason for one to be eliminated in favor of the other(s).
Except for biological niches, geographical niches, and symbiosis.
Which might explain the vast amounts of life on Earth, plus the predator / prey symbiosis, where it would be difficult for both species to die out.
that species which is superior to all others.
And what species would that be? Cats can generally run faster than dogs, but not for such long distances. Fungi can digest a variety of things that other organisms can't. Squid can live at great depths. Plants can create nutrients out of sunlight. What one organism can do all of those things?
Hey, at least he/she acknowledges Abiogenesis. Most fundies you come across lump it in with Big Bang and Evolution. It's a small step but a step none-the-less. And for the record, natural selection favors the barely adequate species. If they were so violently competitive, as you think we claim, then they would be seeking their own destruction, and thus not very fit for survival. Species rely on the survival of other lifeforms for their own survival. Evolution 101.
And what chemical would that be? Hydrogen, rare on Earth, makes up most of the universe. Will all compounds decay to native elements, and elements decay until they are all hydrogen? Chenistry/nuclear physics do not work that way.
One can only hope that humans with subpar intelligence will die off.
All hail Oxygen Hydrate!
No, you blasphemer, you will expire in a combustion event! Hail Dihydrogen Oxide!
Tetrahydrocannabinol?
Oh, if ONLY!!!!
Did someone lobotomize this person or what? S/he gets stupider for each post s/he makes.
There is no "should" involved in natural selection at all. It's just the individuals who manages to stay alive long enough to procreate get their genes spread to the next generation.
...the funny thing is that the only creatures that could do that would be so clever they could get everything they needed by manipulating basic elements, or so simple they didn't need much of anything but destroyed anything that tried to take advantage of them. (Both highly improbable.)
So, like, physical gods or really vicious algae.
Or tribbles.
If you're getting into "should", then you are talking planned breeding, which is very far from Natural.
Abiogenesis does not mean what you think it mean.
Abiogenesis:
image
Although everything else is transparent Fail, NephilimFree's last sentence is correct in the limit of infinite time.
The universe does tend to thermodynamic equilibrium, which means that eventually everything will decay down into photons that steadily lose energy as the universe continues to expand. What Nephilim intends as a strawman could be interpreted as a bad but technically correct description of universal heat death.
Fortunately for us all, the universe is a long way from thermodynamic equilibrium.
Religion in it's simplest form: All religions except the one with the true gods behind it vanish.
Christianity in it's simplest form: All Christians agree on everything because they follow Christ.
God in it's simplest form: Everyone knows that there is a god because they can personally interact with her.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
