Moontanman

Lots of our vertebrate ancestors had no jaw, in fact at one time no vertebrate had jaws. Where do you get this stuff from? So you are asserting irreducible complexity? Really? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html No it is not logical, in fact it's completely false, generally something like a wing, starts out as something else for a completely different reason that what it is currently used for. talkorigins.org is your friend...

I would agree that colonising other planets will come much later than building space habitats. In fact I doubt we will have much use for planets, the risk of biocontamination is too great and the idea of a planet we could live on, even if it did have life, is unlikely. The addition of too little or too much of just trace substances could prevent us from living there at all..

What is the unit for measuring Love, hate, or fright?

Being controversial doesn't imply unknown or lacking knowledge of, nor does it mean it can't be measured.

I bothered to read all three of your links and in no way can i see how they support the assertion that consciousness does not arise from the brain... Can you point me to what I missed? I do know there have instances of brain damage that totally changed who the people were before the accident. This is quite well documented... Not to mention that brain damage often, if not mostly, results in death or a distinct lack of self awareness... I have a significant portion of my brain that is unresponsive, the doctors say it probably happened before or during birth. A large amount of the temporal lobe of my brain is affected. The doctor said it was "interesting" that I seemed to have no cognitive problems but he didn't go into anymore detail. At the time I was young had suffered from a couple blackouts that never happened again so it was never really followed up. My point here is that brain plasticity in no way supports the idea that consciousness does not originate in the material world or the brain... You say: I have to ask why you think the scientific method constitutes a closed mind?

Can you clarify that, I admit I used the term monkey incorrectly but since apes did indeed evolve from primates is we are all primates more accurate?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqPGOhXoprU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ5jh33OiOA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfq5-i8xoIU Possibly, I am not a biochemist, but I know he was using the information wrong. God of the gaps yet again? We weren't there? Ken Ham much? The god of the gaps keeps getting smaller and smaller and nothing supports the idea. Eyewitness testimony is not valid science and deep time is also demonstrably correct.

Apes are a subset of monkeys and evolved from them, since we are apes we are also monkeys...

I don't know, I googled this one to death thinking it had to be out there someplace, evidently it was but it wasn't widely respected..

Something like this?

I have a 3 hour video that completely refutes this one, do not think that no one watches videos but an hour and 20 minutes of nonsense is a lot to ask... It's very source suggests this is nothing but theist obfuscation. Right off the bat it makes unjustified assumptions about what the first life is. Modern bacteria are nothing like what it thought the first life forms were. No one has ever said a cell popped into being out of nothing fully formed... Abiogenesis is indeed thought to be chemical evolution of simple catalysts to more and more complex versions. This guy is talking nonsense... I watched, I can give you the real science behind this and no biochemist is clueless about the origin of life he is being deceptive and obfuscating the facts in his favor for his own reasons... I have to think there is good reason the comments are turned off for this video...

I honestly do not see any bases for the assertions you make clarified in these links. It looks like you are making some interesting but less than justified assumptions...

Visit the link, it's legitimate, it just caught my eye a while ago...

The only reason we say it is a code is because we applied that label to it. Saying it is a code implies a coder, there is no intelligence behind DNA. DNA is nothing but reacting chemicals... It says nothing independent of our own label for it... FNA is no more a code than the unique shape of a rock found on the beach... Maybe this will make it a bit more clear. I live near the beach, I beach comb all the time, the action of the surf sorts out all kinds of things from nit of coral to shells to rocks and other flotsam according to size and shape. The surf does this so well that you can identify certain areas of certain shells just by how the surf is running. It looks like an intelligence is sorting out the pieces, in fact I once walked down the beach and noticed that pieces of bricks dumped in the ocean decades before had been exposed by the action of a recent storm. The pieces had been sorted out by shape. At first I noticed round rod shaped brick fragments and on to ovals and then round balls and then in a very short space were many more or less heart shaped fragments and finally few a very perfect hearts and then as I went on the water worn fragments went back to rounds, ovals, rods and finally stopped being washed up at all.

Electromagnetism is information? citation please... Materialism has been discarded? Citation please. Again, you offer nothing but an assertion, please give a source...

No plan or program exists independent of what we name it, nothing but chemicals that replicate with variation filtered by natural selection. The complexity is built out of the competition for resources via natural selection. We name it a code for our own benefit but it is not a code independent of our label. I am going to go against the grain here and give you a short video that explains this concept much better than i can. Citation please. My sources do not say that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

New evidence may push back the appearance of modern humans to 500,000 years. Early human migration out of Africa and interbreeding with more archaic humans is thought to have occured. https://www.livescience.com/61532-oldest-human-fossils-outside-africa.html?

has anyone considered how existing computer programs that mimic evolution design things like airplanes faster and better than piecemeal engineering? That is a little misleading dude, the ancestors we evolved from (that we shared with modern monkeys) if they existed today would be recognised as monkeys. In fact it can be asserted that we are still monkeys, you never grow out of your ancestry. We are descended from synapsids: thjis in fact is an example of what our ancestors looked like after our line separated from reptiles: The idea is that modern monkeys are not our ancestors anymore than my first cousin is my ancestor... Yes, we do stand on the shoulders of giants, that is very important...

So you are suggesting that creationism or creation is akin to science as a matter of opinion? Simply not true, evolution is true no matter where the the first replicators came from. If you meant your your posts to be neutral and scientific then you should establish that the validity of evidence has no basis in opinion....

What do you see at 09:17? Real dinosaurs!

I'm not willing to assert that, we have no idea what the bounds of technology are, maybe it's possible to manipulate the entire universe in some manner to manage it or even leave it for another... All I can be sure if is if we do not try we will fail...

Yes, quite a bit more than enough but we have to go off planet to get it... A Dyson swarm would be the ticket!