Most British scientists: Richard Dawkins' work misrepresents science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._A._Schwaller_de_Lubicz

René Adolphe Schwaller de Lubicz (December 7, 1887 – 1961), born René Adolphe Schwaller in Alsace-Lorraine, was a French occultist, student of sacred geometry and Egyptologist known for his twelve-year study of the art and architecture of the Temple of Luxor in Egypt and his subsequent book The Temple In Man.[
Schwaller de Lubicz often referred to the books of Moses in the same light as Egyptian theocratic philosophy—as containing universal esoteric principles.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
'Nuff said about this looney!
You see river, people here constantly rebuke your nonsense, not so much because its nonsense, but because you put it as absolute fact.
As you did your crazy Alien war on Mars...:rolleyes:
You may disgree with mainstream science as much as you like, but please don't put your alternative nonsense as gospel in the science threads please. That is against the rules and partly why you have just recently had a holiday.

Pad read the book for your self .

Stop being guided by what anyone else thinks pad . you are constantly doing this .

Are you that insecure you can't read for yourself and develope your own opinion ?

I question books I read , all the time , many people do . I don't find it a big deal .

Your able to read , so what's the hang up with reading ?
 
Pad read the book for your self .

Stop being guided by what anyone else thinks pad . you are constantly doing this .

Are you that insecure you can't read for yourself and develope your own opinion ?

I question books I read , all the time , many people do . I don't find it a big deal .

Your able to read , so what's the hang up with reading ?
river your constant being obtuse and lying fools no one.
You obviously have the "hang up"with books and read...you also claimed no good [or words to that effect came from the Internet]
Plenty of nonsense on the net, just as there is plenty of nonsense in some books, particularly the ones you read.
No, I won't read a book about some fool who indulges in the occult....No, I won't read some book about some fool who claims Aliens have dropped nuclear bombs on Mars....No I wont read a book about some idiot who claims that magnetic fields rule the universe.
I would rather be "guided" as you put it, by reputable scientists then by certified loonies whose books you read.
 
river your constant being obtuse and lying fools no one.
You obviously have the "hang up"with books and read...you also claimed no good [or words to that effect came from the Internet]
Plenty of nonsense on the net, just as there is plenty of nonsense in some books, particularly the ones you read.
No, I won't read a book about some fool who indulges in the occult....No, I won't read some book about some fool who claims Aliens have dropped nuclear bombs on Mars....No I wont read a book about some idiot who claims that magnetic fields rule the universe.
I would rather be "guided" as you put it, by reputable scientists then by certified loonies whose books you read.

river your constant being obtuse and lying fools no one

Pad you are over the line here .
 
Ignoring our troll friend.......
a nice article.....
Chemists claim to have solved riddle of how life began on Earth
March 18, 2015 by Bob Yirka report

Chemistry in a post-meteoritic-impact scenario. A series of post-impact environmental events are shown along with the chemistry (boxed) proposed to occur as a consequence of these events. a, Dissolution of atmospherically produced hydrogen cyanide results in the conversion of vivianite (the anoxic corrosion product of the meteoritic inclusion schreibersite) into mixed ferrocyanide salts and phosphate salts, with counter cations being provided through neutralization and ion-exchange reactions with bedrock and other meteoritic oxides and salts. b, Partial evaporation results in the deposition of the least-soluble salts over a wide area, and further evaporation deposits the most-soluble salts in smaller, lower-lying areas. c, After complete evaporation, impact or geothermal heating results in thermal metamorphosis of the evaporite layer, and the generation of feedstock precursor salts (in bold). d, Rainfall on higher ground (left) leads to rivulets or streams that flow downhill, sequentially leaching feedstocks from the thermally metamorphosed evaporite layer. Solar irradiation drives photoredox chemistry in the streams. Convergent synthesis can result when streams with different reaction histories merge (right), as illustrated here for the potential synthesis of arabinose aminooxazoline at the confluence of two streams that contained glycolaldehyde, and leached different feedstocks before merging. Credit: (c) Nature Chemistry (2015) doi:10.1038/nchem.2202
(Phys.org)—A team of chemists working at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, at Cambridge in the UK believes they have solved the mystery of how it was possible for life to begin on Earth over four billion years ago. In their paper published in the journal Nature Chemistry, the team describes how they were able to map reactions that produced two and three-carbon sugars, amino acids, ribonucleotides and glycerol—the material necessary for metabolism and for creating the building blocks of proteins and ribonucleic acid molecules and also for allowing for the creation of lipids that form cell membranes.



Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp


http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n4/full/nchem.2202.html
Abstract
A minimal cell can be thought of as comprising informational, compartment-forming and metabolic subsystems. To imagine the abiotic assembly of such an overall system, however, places great demands on hypothetical prebiotic chemistry. The perceived differences and incompatibilities between these subsystems have led to the widely held assumption that one or other subsystem must have preceded the others. Here we experimentally investigate the validity of this assumption by examining the assembly of various biomolecular building blocks from prebiotically plausible intermediates and one-carbon feedstock molecules. We show that precursors of ribonucleotides, amino acids and lipids can all be derived by the reductive homologation of hydrogen cyanide and some of its derivatives, and thus that all the cellular subsystems could have arisen simultaneously through common chemistry. The key reaction steps are driven by ultraviolet light, use hydrogen sulfide as the reductant and can be accelerated by Cu(I)–Cu(II) photoredox cycling.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp
 
Ignoring our troll friend.......
a nice article.....
Chemists claim to have solved riddle of how life began on Earth
March 18, 2015 by Bob Yirka report

Chemistry in a post-meteoritic-impact scenario. A series of post-impact environmental events are shown along with the chemistry (boxed) proposed to occur as a consequence of these events. a, Dissolution of atmospherically produced hydrogen cyanide results in the conversion of vivianite (the anoxic corrosion product of the meteoritic inclusion schreibersite) into mixed ferrocyanide salts and phosphate salts, with counter cations being provided through neutralization and ion-exchange reactions with bedrock and other meteoritic oxides and salts. b, Partial evaporation results in the deposition of the least-soluble salts over a wide area, and further evaporation deposits the most-soluble salts in smaller, lower-lying areas. c, After complete evaporation, impact or geothermal heating results in thermal metamorphosis of the evaporite layer, and the generation of feedstock precursor salts (in bold). d, Rainfall on higher ground (left) leads to rivulets or streams that flow downhill, sequentially leaching feedstocks from the thermally metamorphosed evaporite layer. Solar irradiation drives photoredox chemistry in the streams. Convergent synthesis can result when streams with different reaction histories merge (right), as illustrated here for the potential synthesis of arabinose aminooxazoline at the confluence of two streams that contained glycolaldehyde, and leached different feedstocks before merging. Credit: (c) Nature Chemistry (2015) doi:10.1038/nchem.2202
(Phys.org)—A team of chemists working at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, at Cambridge in the UK believes they have solved the mystery of how it was possible for life to begin on Earth over four billion years ago. In their paper published in the journal Nature Chemistry, the team describes how they were able to map reactions that produced two and three-carbon sugars, amino acids, ribonucleotides and glycerol—the material necessary for metabolism and for creating the building blocks of proteins and ribonucleic acid molecules and also for allowing for the creation of lipids that form cell membranes.



Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp


http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n4/full/nchem.2202.html
Abstract
A minimal cell can be thought of as comprising informational, compartment-forming and metabolic subsystems. To imagine the abiotic assembly of such an overall system, however, places great demands on hypothetical prebiotic chemistry. The perceived differences and incompatibilities between these subsystems have led to the widely held assumption that one or other subsystem must have preceded the others. Here we experimentally investigate the validity of this assumption by examining the assembly of various biomolecular building blocks from prebiotically plausible intermediates and one-carbon feedstock molecules. We show that precursors of ribonucleotides, amino acids and lipids can all be derived by the reductive homologation of hydrogen cyanide and some of its derivatives, and thus that all the cellular subsystems could have arisen simultaneously through common chemistry. The key reaction steps are driven by ultraviolet light, use hydrogen sulfide as the reductant and can be accelerated by Cu(I)–Cu(II) photoredox cycling.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp

But what gives life intelligence , an intellect .

Hence organic chemistry .
 
You read nothing pad , what your doing is trying to put your problems onto someone else .
Hi River, many folk may think you are lying when you say things like that. I don't but can you understand how folk could see it that way.
Paddoboy obviously reads something so to say he reads nothing is wrong, I would not say you lie but what you say is wrong.
Alex
 

OK

Yes we do .

No we don't NEED.

While
we often do, we don't NEED.

Without any purpose we Humans are in limbo.

Never been to limbo.

What's the weather like there?

Is it close to purgatory?

Humans become then venerable to manipulation of control by any being on Earth and beyond .

Do we?

The shield of purpose and laser sword of truth protects us?

Yah.

Dumpty and Poe :)




 
Evolution

Now why does evolution chemically happen ?
You playing your usual games again river? :rolleyes:
Evolution is a fact lad that we observe.....Abiogenisis is another fact lad, but we lack the exact know how and methodology.
The following may explain it to you....hopefully.
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-evolution-really-occur-Why-do-species-adapt-to-survive

Evolution happens because it can't not happen. Evolutionary change is a property of life. I've gone into more detail about this here: Madalyn Zimbric's answer to What exactly is evolution?

When thinking about adaptation, it helps to turn it around. It isn't that a species adapts, it's that the environment selects. Organisms are constantly producing offspring with varying traits, whether through mutation, recombination, or some other mechanism. The environment kills some of these offspring and handicaps others. The force that causes adaptation is that of the environment on the organism, not some creative force within the organism.

Organisms adapt because their offspring vary in their ability to survive and reproduce in the environment. If the environment were perfect and every child was able to reproduce equally well there would be no adaptation. Since there are no perfect environments, species adapt.

Evolution isn't this.
main-qimg-a0a4e90c0523ba28c5b21d953545c3f8-c




Evolution is more like this. (This is a quality control test. If the car part doesn't "survive in its environment" it gets tossed out.)
main-qimg-5b48c1a20ff2b406e5c20f3eeeadd942-c





 
OK



No we don't NEED.

While
we often do, we don't NEED.



Never been to limbo.

What's the weather like there?

Is it close to purgatory?



Do we?

The shield of purpose and laser sword of truth protects us?

Yah.

Dumpty and Poe :)




We do need .

Purgatory ? snowing , love it .
 
You playing your usual games again river? :rolleyes:
Evolution is a fact lad that we observe.....Abiogenisis is another fact lad, but we lack the exact know how and methodology.
The following may explain it to you....hopefully.
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-evolution-really-occur-Why-do-species-adapt-to-survive

Evolution happens because it can't not happen. Evolutionary change is a property of life. I've gone into more detail about this here: Madalyn Zimbric's answer to What exactly is evolution?

When thinking about adaptation, it helps to turn it around. It isn't that a species adapts, it's that the environment selects. Organisms are constantly producing offspring with varying traits, whether through mutation, recombination, or some other mechanism. The environment kills some of these offspring and handicaps others. The force that causes adaptation is that of the environment on the organism, not some creative force within the organism.

Organisms adapt because their offspring vary in their ability to survive and reproduce in the environment. If the environment were perfect and every child was able to reproduce equally well there would be no adaptation. Since there are no perfect environments, species adapt.

Evolution isn't this.
main-qimg-a0a4e90c0523ba28c5b21d953545c3f8-c




Evolution is more like this. (This is a quality control test. If the car part doesn't "survive in its environment" it gets tossed out.)
main-qimg-5b48c1a20ff2b406e5c20f3eeeadd942-c





I get evolution pad . no problem .

It is in the end about intellect , the awareness .

A snakes venom , why some are more potent than others , and why ? not why but how ?

The tia-pan in the northern part of Austrialia is the deadlest snake in the world , because it bites several times . but gives little venom .

The Brown snake bites less but gives more venom . but just as deadly .

My question is what is the root of the difference , between the two ?

Understand me ?
 

Intelligent Design and Young Earth Creationist organisations often misrepresent evolution by stating that it does not explain the origin of life. This is a dishonest tactic. Of course the theory of evolution doesn't explain the origin of life. It is not supposed to. The origin of life or abiogenesis is within the field of chemistry not biology. Evolution explains the diversity of life within the field of biology not chemistry.

Neil deGrasse Tyson takes us on a journey. A journey towards life of Earth.
 
Lets go back to why life can even exist in the first place . does life USE non-living material to manifest life ? of course it does . obviously since we need certain minerals to function normally.

Every life form does so .

But to me every life form tries to reach its full potenial.

And this has to do with this being , ID , if you like , being in every sub-quantum particle .

Non-living, or abiogenesis substance has the ability to form life given the right enviroment, the right combination of abiogenesis, molecule , because the potential of life was already imbeded into the sub-quantum particle , in the first place .

Because this being is the essence of all plasma and matter , magnetic fields , vibration , space , electromagnetism etc. this being is the Universe . in every way shape or form .
You may say that non-life has the potential to become life, but it's unnecessary to use a being to explain it. It's chemistry. In fact, I would say it's the exact opposite of a being, it has no center, no intelligence, and it's passive in nature.
 
Evolution.


All too well. :rolleyes:

If you don't like the answers then google the net, or get a reputable book.

Evolution ; yes

But Evolution how so ?

Does then the snake think ? oh my venom is not good enough , therefore the snake increases its venom .

Now my point is these snakes have intelligence .
 
Back
Top