Saturday, March 20, 2021

This is not a beautiful woven tapestry. It is not a painting. It is the most detailed image of a human cell to date, obtained by radiography, nuclear magnetic resonance and cryoelectron microscopy.


I'm gonna say this did not arise spontaneously from some kind of primordial soup

 


20 comments:

  1. This is what is called "an artistic interpretation". For one, non of the mentioned methods provide color images.
    As to spontaneous creation - most likely not spontaneous, but evolved over millions of years. The archebacteria, for example, are much simpler than this, and there is a consistent evolutionary path from simple to more complex organisms.
    But, of course, a single image would not change one's believes. I am making an observation, not a statement about how it happened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The passage of time is not a mode of action. Saying something happened because of the passage of time (even Millions of years) is merely obfuscation. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics demonstrates that all processes in nature move from complex to simple. It is termed "Entropy". The Evolutionists would have us believe that the opposite occurs but only in living things and then only until they find some nebulous "niche". This is also known as Magic.

      Delete
    2. Tagging on Stuart: time is not a force, it is a space. Forces operate within time. More time, less time = irrelevant, absent causes that explain effects.

      Delete
  2. Everything on the computer is questionable now.
    Primordial soup. please

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SAY! When WILL Campbells come out with it's own "Primordial Soup"?

      Delete
  3. I doubt that the picture is meant to deceive. "And therefore as a stranger give it welcome. "There are more things in heaven and earth...than are dreamt of in your (our) philosophy."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The image is colorized for ease of use - the same as the photos of the cosmos.

      Delete
  4. People will deny obvious truths, and you cannot argue them out of it with facts and logic, because they didn't come to their position using facts and logic.

    The Darwinian idea of evolution is quite simply impossible for even something like vision, because there simply hasn't been enough time on any scale to get to the literally thousands of pieces in the chain, all of which must work before there's any gain of function, to randomly occur.
    One does not randomly evolve a hundred pieces of a lock, each useless on their own, just to wait until the last tumbler clicks into place, and suddenly you have stereoscopic color vision. But that's how the Darwinian model posits in must have happened, despite the fact that it's impossible even on a long time scale of the age of life.

    Confronted with things like that, the handwaving and mumbo-jumbo imprecations begin, and there you are.

    But thanks for the pic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1, and: “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”
      Can a truly intellectually honest person actually believe in evolution?
      There’s a reason it’s still called the “theory of evolution”. It has never been and cannot be proven.
      -JLM

      Delete
    2. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in creation. Think about sexual reproduction. Two organisms had to evolve to become the same but different then know how to reproduce and somehow find each other.

      Delete
  5. Biochemistry and molecular biology can explain spontaneous generation of amino acid chains, nucleic acid chains, and lipid vesicles. It cannot explain lipid encapsulated, RNA directed protein synthesis. Not on any timeline that we can postulate.
    Agreed with Aesop here. And the quote from Hamlet.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Amen! Glory to God in the highest, Creator of heaven and earth!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Natural selection involves two steps. First, some random mutation produces a change in the genetics. Second, the environment selects those mutations that improve the organisms ability to reproduce.

    The second part is the key. It is the part that is always ignored by critics of TONS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... and additionally, there must be multiple organisms that have the mutation simultaneously and they must successfully reproduce. This must happen across all living organisms. Fat chance.

      Delete
  8. OH OH. Isn't that round thing about 11 O'clock a single Covid-19 particle?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure looks like it and another up at the top lurking under the overpass.....whomever this is from is infested with them.....must not have been wearing a mask!

      Delete
  9. I cannot repeat my standard line to the darwinians here the trolls would come out.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The view from a hot air balloon by a group of flower children high on mushrooms as they float over disneyland?

    ReplyDelete
  11. If a creator doesn't sign their work, file for a patent or otherwise claim ownership does that prove they weren't the creator?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ask a mathematician how small the number is for billions of years (in seconds) compared to the complexity of a single short protein. All of time is not enough time for random chance.

    ReplyDelete