Discussion:
Evolution is BULLSHIT
(too old to reply)
Samuel Harrigon
2017-12-31 03:18:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
do your goddamn research

Rev Samuel Harrigon
Good Old Gospel Ship Church
Mitchell Holman
2017-12-31 03:56:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?

Ever gotten a vaccination?

Then you believe in evolution.
Samuel Harrigon
2017-12-31 04:00:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Then you believe in evolution.
No I don't. I believe that God created us. There is no such thing as evolution. We did not come from monkeys.

Rev. Samuel Harrigon
Good Old Gospel Ship Church
a322x1n
2017-12-31 14:26:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Mitchell Holman
2017-12-31 15:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
aaa
2018-01-01 02:07:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up the
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there is
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in virus
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.

So vaccination has nothing to do with evolution.

Vaccination is only another typical example that evolution has only
plagiarized modern medical science to justify itself. It actually
proves, beyond reasonable doubt, that evolution doesn't really
understand life.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-01 02:57:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up the
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there is
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in virus
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?

Say again?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle


http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/viral-lifecycle


https://courses.lumenlearning.com/microbiology/chapter/the-viral-life-
cycle/
aaa
2018-01-03 11:04:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA. It's entirely parasitical. In fact, it's more like
biological poison.
Post by Mitchell Holman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle
http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/viral-lifecycle
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/microbiology/chapter/the-viral-life-
cycle/
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-03 13:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.


"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
aaa
2018-01-03 19:09:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.

The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.

That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.

Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.

I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Malcolm McMahon
2018-01-04 11:48:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
A virus has RNA, not DNA. A very similar molecule, but a little simpler. What it lacks is the apparatus for transcribing RNA into more functional molecules. This apparatus it hijacks in the cells it invades.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life.
Teleology again. Viruses don't exist "in order" to do anything, they exist because they can, like all lifeforms.
Post by aaa
It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
No, it has no goal to kill. In fact a parasite that kills the host is a poorly adapted one.
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
A crematorium does not kill anyone.
Post by aaa
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
A virus replicates itself, and it does this by using hijacking a cell. It's not capable of reproducing itself in isolation, but neither is any life form.

You could not reproduce yourself without hijacking the material of many animals and plants.
aaa
2018-01-04 15:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Post by Malcolm McMahon
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13-
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant
to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first
hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations we all
did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral
infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is
concerned. Since a virus is never alive, it's not even
life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists.
Virus doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either deoxyribonucleic
acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA)" http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction.
So that doesn't sound right to me.
A virus has RNA, not DNA. A very similar molecule, but a little
simpler. What it lacks is the apparatus for transcribing RNA into
more functional molecules. This apparatus it hijacks in the cells it
invades.
Thanks for the explanation. So the web page doesn't even get the basic
facts right.
Post by Malcolm McMahon
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think
there are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key
in the carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes
microbiological metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So
virus exists for the decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is
not life.
Teleology again. Viruses don't exist "in order" to do anything, they
exist because they can, like all lifeforms.
The functionality of viruses doesn't look like life to me.
Post by Malcolm McMahon
Post by aaa
It doesn't care about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it
doesn't have to care whether itself is alive or not, or able to
reproduce or not.
No, it has no goal to kill. In fact a parasite that kills the host is a poorly adapted one.
Since viruses are parasitic that do kill their host, how can you deny
that killing is its goal?
Post by Malcolm McMahon
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it
the crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
A crematorium does not kill anyone.
That's why viruses should not stay in a living host. They belong to the
cemetery.
Post by Malcolm McMahon
Post by aaa
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of
self-replication. That is obviously a false statement since it
admits that virus relies on the host cell to replicate itself.
A virus replicates itself, and it does this by using hijacking a
cell. It's not capable of reproducing itself in isolation, but
neither is any life form.
You could not reproduce yourself without hijacking the material of many animals and plants.
That's a generalization to ignore the obvious fact.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Don Martin
2018-01-04 23:00:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 03:48:08 -0800 (PST), Malcolm McMahon
Post by Malcolm McMahon
You could not reproduce yourself without hijacking the material of many animals and plants.
This _is_ aaa you are addressing here. Who would wish it to
reproduce?
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-05 00:11:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".

A DNA virus needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.

Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.

And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?

If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.

Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.

Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
hleopold
2018-01-05 03:37:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
Selene
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness (remove gene to email)
Teresita
2018-01-05 03:40:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Atlatl Axolotl
2018-01-05 05:30:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
.> If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
.> alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.

He is. And "bbb" as well. His style is, let us say, unmistakable.

He kept harping on philosophy as the way to true knowledge,
so some time back I presented him with well known
philosophers who came to quite different conclusions on some issue.

Turns out those weren't *real* philosophers. What he means
by "philosophy" isn't the same things as what, you know, actual
philosophers mean by the word.


AA
hleopold
2018-01-05 08:24:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
.> If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
.> alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
He is. And "bbb" as well. His style is, let us say, unmistakable.
He kept harping on philosophy as the way to true knowledge,
so some time back I presented him with well known
philosophers who came to quite different conclusions on some issue.
Turns out those weren't *real* philosophers. What he means
by "philosophy" isn't the same things as what, you know, actual
philosophers mean by the word.
AA
Which he wouldn’t know anyway, since he also does not read any books on
philosophy. Or anything else from what I gather.
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness (remove gene to email)

"I've got a pen and I'm not afraid to use it."-Charles R Ward
aaa
2018-01-05 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hleopold
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
.> If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
.> alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
He is. And "bbb" as well. His style is, let us say, unmistakable.
He kept harping on philosophy as the way to true knowledge,
so some time back I presented him with well known
philosophers who came to quite different conclusions on some issue.
Turns out those weren't *real* philosophers. What he means
by "philosophy" isn't the same things as what, you know, actual
philosophers mean by the word.
AA
Which he wouldn’t know anyway, since he also does not read any books on
philosophy. Or anything else from what I gather.
The same as the second law, I started learning and understanding
philosophy from a year ago. At this point, modern philosophy is nothing
to me. The only authentic philosophy is the original philosophy taught
by Socrates and Plato, but not Aristotle.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
hleopold
2018-01-05 08:22:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Place him anywhere and things don’t go so well for him. And yes, he is
nunian, who used to claim that his mother threw away his picture of God (or
Jesus, I really don’t remember which), a picture of an old Chinese man. He
also claimed that he lost half his brain after being hit by a bus, as I
recall.
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness (remove gene to email)

“Out there, in some distant misty corner of the Internet, is the sound of
someone giving a fuck. You need to go find that poor besnotted bobbleheaded
dungpile and talk to it instead.“-Doc Smartass
aaa
2018-01-05 18:47:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-05 19:14:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He,
literally, knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the
bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
Why did you change from "nunian" to "aaa"?
aaa
2018-01-06 06:26:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He,
literally, knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the
bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
Why did you change from "nunian" to "aaa"?
Niunian in Chinese means the year of ox. It's the year I started using
eternal-september. aaa is the login name of my Linux system.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Yap Honghor
2018-01-07 03:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He,
literally, knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the
bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
Why did you change from "nunian" to "aaa"?
Niunian in Chinese means the year of ox. It's the year I started using
eternal-september. aaa is the login name of my Linux system.
Ya, you are truly as stubborn as an ox, incapable of understanding whatever we painstakingly trying to feed you with logical explanation....
aaa
2018-01-07 11:57:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it.
He, literally, knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried
to read the bible, but it kept putting him to sleep. So
telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in
there. I did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think
it helped me to keep a clear mind.
Why did you change from "nunian" to "aaa"?
Niunian in Chinese means the year of ox. It's the year I started
using eternal-september. aaa is the login name of my Linux system.
Ya, you are truly as stubborn as an ox, incapable of understanding
whatever we painstakingly trying to feed you with logical
explanation....
Don't be too disappointed. Your knowledge is all mine, but your bullshit
and cluelessness I left intact.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Teresita
2018-01-06 00:28:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
Atlatl Axolotl
2018-01-06 00:33:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
May be a bit too local a reference for him.

But then maybe he gets the gag philosophically.

AA
Don Martin
2018-01-06 16:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 16:33:59 -0800 (PST), Atlatl Axolotl
Post by Atlatl Axolotl
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
May be a bit too local a reference for him.
But then maybe he gets the gag philosophically.
I would not hold my halitosis for him getting anything
philosophically.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
aaa
2018-01-06 06:33:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2018-01-07 05:59:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
aaa
2018-01-07 12:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2018-01-08 19:17:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
Then, no intelligence is required to rewrite the laws of
thermal dynamics, and our understanding of biology and of
the history of life on earth?

Do you think a bacterium has that much intelligence too?
Can it discover the same factoids that you have revealed?
aaa
2018-01-09 08:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
Then, no intelligence is required to rewrite the laws of
thermal dynamics, and our understanding of biology and of
the history of life on earth?
Do you think a bacterium has that much intelligence too?
Can it discover the same factoids that you have revealed?
I have no idea what you are talking about. I only shared some personal
understanding. Such understanding has been around us all these years.
It's everywhere already. It's not something new, and I only learned it
from the best of you.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Tim
2018-01-09 09:37:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it
kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to
happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
Then, no intelligence is required to rewrite the laws of
thermal dynamics, and our understanding of biology and of
the history of life on earth?
Do you think a bacterium has that much intelligence too?
Can it discover the same factoids that you have revealed?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Post by aaa
I only shared some personal
understanding. Such understanding has been around us all these years.
It's everywhere already. It's not something new, and I only learned it
from the best of you.
You don't understand, you just believe you do.
aaa
2018-01-09 12:11:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He, literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it
kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to
happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
Then, no intelligence is required to rewrite the laws of
thermal dynamics, and our understanding of biology and of
the history of life on earth?
Do you think a bacterium has that much intelligence too?
Can it discover the same factoids that you have revealed?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Post by aaa
I only shared some personal
understanding. Such understanding has been around us all these years.
It's everywhere already. It's not something new, and I only learned it
from the best of you.
You don't understand, you just believe you do.
Fine. Have it your way. I don't want to argue with you anymore.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Tim
2018-01-09 12:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Tim
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
Post by hleopold
aaa tries to argue the bible, without having ever read it. He,
literally,
knows nothing. He recently claimed he tried to read the bible, but it
kept
putting him to sleep. So telling him to read anything is not going to
happen.
If aaa is "nunian" as some have said, then I've seen him in
alt.philosophy.taoism too, and things didn't go so well there either.
Nice to meet you. I was quite ignorant when I was talking in there. I
did learn and practice Chinese Zen back then. I think it helped me to
keep a clear mind.
That was Zen, this is Tao.
A LOL and a whoosh!
Post by aaa
I had been a quiet reader of alt.zen for many years as well.
You are quite well read. You must have had time to read
the bible too.
The highest teaching is the most difficult to grasp. It's beyond my
single digit IQ... Learning a couple of Bible quotes from people like
you is the best I can do.
Then, no intelligence is required to rewrite the laws of
thermal dynamics, and our understanding of biology and of
the history of life on earth?
Do you think a bacterium has that much intelligence too?
Can it discover the same factoids that you have revealed?
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Post by aaa
I only shared some personal
understanding. Such understanding has been around us all these years.
It's everywhere already. It's not something new, and I only learned it
from the best of you.
You don't understand, you just believe you do.
Fine. Have it your way. I don't want to argue with you anymore.
You haven't provided an argument. You've just tried to de-define meaningful words then you tossed them together into a meaningless pile of word salad.
You just keep running around in circles assuming that your god exists, and then claiming that your assumption proves god is. You don't even know what an argument is. But feel free to piss off. It doesn't bother me.
aaa
2018-01-05 06:11:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.


needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-05 13:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned.
Since a virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the
change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So
that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are
a form of life and the posted proof proves it.
Post by aaa
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think
there are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key
in the carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes
microbiological metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So
virus exists for the decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not
life. It doesn't care about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it
doesn't have to care whether itself is alive or not, or able to
reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care
about anything. It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms
have: reproduce yourself. If you don't, you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which
is essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle
aaa
2018-01-05 15:57:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned.
Since a virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the
change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So
that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are
a form of life and the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think
there are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key
in the carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes
microbiological metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So
virus exists for the decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not
life. It doesn't care about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it
doesn't have to care whether itself is alive or not, or able to
reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care
about anything. It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms
have: reproduce yourself. If you don't, you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which
is essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be another
misnomer.
Post by Mitchell Holman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-05 19:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13- 859f-a575ced5d300
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned.
Since a virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the
change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So
that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are
a form of life and the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your "standard of life" not the issue.
Viruses are life forms, in fact there is a
whole branch of science (virology) devoted
to studying them.
aaa
2018-01-06 06:54:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13- 859f-a575ced5d300
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned.
Since a virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore,
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction.
So
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are
a form of life and the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your "standard of life" not the issue.
Viruses are life forms, in fact there is a
whole branch of science (virology) devoted
to studying them.
In my opinion, it should not be very different from toxicology. One is
about biological poison. The other is about chemical poison.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Yap Honghor
2018-01-06 01:04:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned.
Since a virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the
change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did
read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own
DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So
that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are
a form of life and the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your personal standard is your own. Since you don't like universal standard, no others will take note of yours.
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think
there are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key
in the carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes
microbiological metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So
virus exists for the decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not
life. It doesn't care about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it
doesn't have to care whether itself is alive or not, or able to
reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care
about anything. It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms
have: reproduce yourself. If you don't, you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
genetic material into your own DNA.
Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which
is essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be another
misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own, whether you like them or not.
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
aaa
2018-01-06 06:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 12:09:40 PM UTC-7, aaa
Samuel Harrigon <***@gmail.com> wrote in news:ddc8c7be-c6ff-46f8-b548-***@googlegroups.com:
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
wrote in news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13-
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply
pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade
poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience
evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to
assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible
viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is
concerned. Since a virus is never alive, it's not
even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of
life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from
scientists. Virus doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify.
I did read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus
has its own DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its
own reproduction. So that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such
thing. I don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out
yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are a form of life and
the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your personal standard is your own. Since you don't like universal
standard, no others will take note of yours.
I'm not sure there is a universal standard yet. Otherwise, there
wouldn't be the argument.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the
first sentence there -- is one example. The host cell
provides that. The virus has none on its own, nor does it
have any of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more
than DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's
replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I
"Viruses are key in the carbon cycle; their role in ocean
biochemistry includes microbiological metabolic—including
decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It
doesn't care about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it
doesn't have to care whether itself is alive or not, or
able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no
"purpose". You're right that "it doesn't care about life" --
it doesn't care about anything. It has no "goal". Other than
the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself. If you don't,
you go extinct.
And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number
of them resident in your own body. And some of them have
inserted their genetic material into your own DNA.
Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct
which is essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You
need to demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be
alive.
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection. Apparently, they are never alive to be killed in
the first place.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_life_cycle
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness,
intelligence, happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom,
and life itself.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-06 13:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection.
Wrong.

"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."

https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
aaa
2018-01-07 03:26:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection.
Wrong.
"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."
https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
That is rather limited measure on certain viral infections. It only
works like an antidote. Viral infection is generally untreatable. That's
what I have learned. The influenza medication doesn't really kill the
flu virus.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-07 04:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection.
Wrong.
"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."
https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
That is rather limited measure on certain viral infections. It only
works like an antidote. Viral infection is generally untreatable. That's
what I have learned.
The posted proof proves you wrong,
viral infections ARE treatable to a
limited extent.

Since you have no training biology
why not look up your erroneous opinions
BEFORE you post them?
aaa
2018-01-07 12:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a322x1n
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive
treatment
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
for viral infection.
Wrong.
"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."
https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
That is rather limited measure on certain viral infections. It only
works like an antidote. Viral infection is generally untreatable.
That's
Post by aaa
what I have learned.
The posted proof proves you wrong,
viral infections ARE treatable to a
limited extent.
But you should realize that the measures can only interfere,
inhibit(delay?), or resist the viruses. It doesn't really kill or
destroy the viruses. It should be the proof that viruses have no life to
be killed.
Post by a322x1n
Since you have no training biology
why not look up your erroneous opinions
BEFORE you post them?
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are
alive. It's about life which is philosophy. So I'm perfectly qualified
to make a comment.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-07 13:22:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by a322x1n
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive
treatment
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
for viral infection.
Wrong.
"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."
https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
That is rather limited measure on certain viral infections. It only
works like an antidote. Viral infection is generally untreatable.
That's
Post by aaa
what I have learned.
The posted proof proves you wrong,
viral infections ARE treatable to a
limited extent.
But you should realize that the measures can only interfere,
inhibit(delay?), or resist the viruses. It doesn't really kill or
destroy the viruses. It should be the proof that viruses have no life to
be killed.
Post by a322x1n
Since you have no training biology
why not look up your erroneous opinions
BEFORE you post them?
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are
alive. It's about life which is philosophy. So I'm perfectly qualified
to make a comment.
But wait - you said you don't know
anything about philosophy either.


"I never bothered to read philosophy."
"aaa", April 23, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/l2gt9ku


So you know nothing about science,
you know nothing about the Bible, you
know nothing about philosophy, yet you
are contradicting the posted proof on
all three.

Odd, that.
Teresita
2018-01-07 13:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
So you know nothing about science,
you know nothing about the Bible, you
know nothing about philosophy, yet you
are contradicting the posted proof on
all three.
Odd, that.
Triple-A: "Wait one moment, another teaching is coming to me."

(aaa rumbles in his seat for a bit. Meanwhile, Teresita notices all the
Taco Bell wrappers laying around)
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-08 06:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by a322x1n
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
If viruses are not alive how can they have a life cycle?
If they are not even alive, calling it a life cycle must be
another misnomer.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their
own,
Post by aaa
Post by a322x1n
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Yap Honghor
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive
treatment
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
for viral infection.
Wrong.
"There are some medications that work directly
on viruses. These are called antiviral medications.
They work by inhibiting the production of virus
particles. Some interfere with the production of
viral DNA. Others prevent viruses from entering
host cells. There are other ways in which these
medications work. In general, antiviral medications
are most effective when they're taken early on in
the course of an initial viral infection or a
recurrent outbreak. Different kinds of antiviral
medications may be used to treat chickenpox,
shingles, herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1), herpes
simplex virus-2 (HSV-2), HIV, hepatitis B,
hepatitis C, and influenza."
https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/viral_infections
That is rather limited measure on certain viral infections. It only
works like an antidote. Viral infection is generally untreatable.
That's
Post by aaa
what I have learned.
The posted proof proves you wrong,
viral infections ARE treatable to a
limited extent.
But you should realize that the measures can only interfere,
inhibit(delay?), or resist the viruses. It doesn't really kill or
destroy the viruses. It should be the proof that viruses have no life
to
Post by aaa
be killed.
Post by a322x1n
Since you have no training biology
why not look up your erroneous opinions
BEFORE you post them?
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are
alive. It's about life which is philosophy. So I'm perfectly qualified
to make a comment.
But wait - you said you don't know
anything about philosophy either.
"I never bothered to read philosophy."
"aaa", April 23, 2017
http://tinyurl.com/l2gt9ku
So you know nothing about science,
you know nothing about the Bible, you
know nothing about philosophy, yet you
are contradicting the posted proof on
all three.
Odd, that.
If I don't know anything at all, why am I here?

Yes, I don't know much about science, philosophy, and the Bible, but I
do have a limited understanding about them. I don't want to be a
scientist, a philosopher, or a Bible scholar. I just want a debate to
discuss and learn. Is that not allowed?

:-)
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Teresita
2018-01-07 13:32:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-08 06:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Teresita
2018-01-08 12:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
Unless the life is that of Terri Schialvo, then we must keep her alive
at all costs. Governor Jeb said so.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-08 15:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
Unless the life is that of Terri Schialvo, then we must keep her alive
at all costs. Governor Jeb said so.
I actually don't agree with that. This physical world is nothing of
value to life. The reason we follow Jesus is to go on our spiritual
journey to return to God to have the true life and true happiness in
God's perfect heaven. There is no need for life to linger in a
vegetative state. There is a difference between valuing life and fearing
death. Assisted suicide is definitely wrong, but prolonged vegetative
state is pointless suffering.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Teresita
2018-01-09 02:23:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
This physical world is nothing of value to life.
Psalm 104:14-15 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb
for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to
shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-09 08:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Teresita
This physical world is nothing of value to life.
Psalm 104:14-15 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb
for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to
shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.
That is why God is always more important than all the things we have on
earth. There would be nothing if we missed God.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Mitchell Holman
2018-01-08 13:46:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
like the "demonstrated consciousness" of bacteria?





"It's our action that has caused the bacteria
to seek help from God."
"aaa", Dec 24 2016
http://tinyurl.com/zjsc75e
aaa
2018-01-08 15:14:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
like the "demonstrated consciousness" of bacteria?
Yes.
Post by Mitchell Holman
"It's our action that has caused the bacteria
to seek help from God."
"aaa", Dec 24 2016
http://tinyurl.com/zjsc75e
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Alex W.
2018-01-08 23:18:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
  A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
So when you are under a general anaesthetic during surgery, you are not
alive....
Teresita
2018-01-09 01:22:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
So when you are under a general anaesthetic during surgery, you are not
alive....
It is a pretty good sneak preview of not being alive.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-09 07:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
So when you are under a general anaesthetic during surgery, you are not
alive....
No. We also have subconsciousness. It's what keeps our body alive. If
our subconsciousness is put to sleep, then we may never wake up again.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Alex W.
2018-01-09 08:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Alex W.
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
  A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
So when you are under a general anaesthetic during surgery, you are not
alive....
No. We also have subconsciousness. It's what keeps our body alive. If
our subconsciousness is put to sleep, then we may never wake up again.
Erm ... no. We do have an autonomous nervous system which is designed
to operate independently of our consciousness. But general anaesthetic
is specifically designed to suppress these autonomous actions: without
special apparatus and an anaesthetist to operate them, we would die on
the table.
Teresita
2018-01-09 11:18:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
But general anaesthetic is specifically designed to suppress these
autonomous actions: without special apparatus and an anaesthetist to
operate them, we would die on the table.
No, more like you would beg to die on the table, like soldiers did in
the Mexican War and shit.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2018-01-09 12:41:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by aaa
Post by Alex W.
Post by aaa
Post by Teresita
I'm not talking about biology. I'm talking about whether viruses are alive.
A forest fire is born in a lightning storm, it feeds on trees, it
creates ash as waste, it grows, it struggles with predators
(firefighters), it reproduces with flying spores (embers), and it dies.
A forest fire is therefore alive by any definition.
I disagree. Life requires consciousness, and consciousness has to be
demonstrated.
So when you are under a general anaesthetic during surgery, you are not
alive....
No. We also have subconsciousness. It's what keeps our body alive. If
our subconsciousness is put to sleep, then we may never wake up again.
Erm ... no. We do have an autonomous nervous system which is designed
to operate independently of our consciousness. But general anaesthetic
is specifically designed to suppress these autonomous actions: without
special apparatus and an anaesthetist to operate them, we would die on
the table.
Sorry, I see I have not understood the issue clearly.

Yes, consciousness can always be made to temporarily leave the body. In
fact, our consciousness returns to God's spiritual realm in our heart
every night during the deep sleep. That's because it needs to be
nourished and restored by God. If our consciousness couldn't return to
God, we would wake up in the morning feeling very tired. If it does
return to God, we will wake up in the morning feeling energetic and
refreshed.

So, God is even essential for us to have a good night sleep.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Teresita
2018-01-09 11:19:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
If our subconsciousness is put to sleep, then we may never wake up again.
Our subconscious is asleep by definition.
--
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
Yap Honghor
2018-01-07 03:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 12:09:40 PM UTC-7, aaa
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
wrote in news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13-
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply
pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade
poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience
evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to
assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible
viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is
concerned. Since a virus is never alive, it's not
even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of
life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from
scientists. Virus doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify.
I did read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus
has its own DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its
own reproduction. So that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such
thing. I don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out
yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are a form of life and
the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your personal standard is your own. Since you don't like universal
standard, no others will take note of yours.
I'm not sure there is a universal standard yet. Otherwise, there
wouldn't be the argument.
Whether universal standard is here or not, you will ignore every thing.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection. Apparently, they are never alive to be killed in
the first place.
Viral infection is caused by virus and they are around us since the beginning of time.....
aaa
2018-01-07 12:27:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 12:09:40 PM UTC-7, aaa
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
wrote in news:31f807d6-dffd-4d13-
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply
pray.
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade
poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Samuel Harrigon
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience
evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to
assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible
viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is
concerned. Since a virus is never alive, it's not
even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of
life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from
scientists. Virus doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify.
I did read somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus
has its own DNA, it would not need to invade a host for its
own reproduction. So that doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
A DNA virus
Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such
thing. I don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out
yourselves.
We don't need to "figure it out". Viruses are a form of life and
the posted proof proves it.
I disagree. My standard of life is rather high.
Your personal standard is your own. Since you don't like universal
standard, no others will take note of yours.
I'm not sure there is a universal standard yet. Otherwise, there
wouldn't be the argument.
Whether universal standard is here or not, you will ignore every thing.
Just trying to better understand what life is. I'm open for all kinds of
insight.
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Any lifeform can be killed. Viruses are living matters of their own,
whether you like them or not.
Except, they can't be killed. It's why there is no definitive treatment
for viral infection. Apparently, they are never alive to be killed in
the first place.
Viral infection is caused by virus and they are around us since the beginning of time.....
Had we not sinned, they would never harm us.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-05 19:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
.> > A DNA virus
.> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
.> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.

Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
.> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
.> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
.> > genetic material into your own DNA.
.> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
.> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
.> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.

I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
.> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.

As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
this.

Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.

Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Cloud Hobbit
2018-01-06 00:56:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
IIRC pine trees need a fire to release their seeds.

I guess they aren't alive either.
That would seem to apply to most plants that need wind and insects to spread their pollen.

If aaa lost half his brain it must have been the part that prevents him from lying and misunderstanding the written word like isolated system.
aaa
2018-01-06 07:49:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
IIRC pine trees need a fire to release their seeds.
I guess they aren't alive either. That would seem to apply to most
plants that need wind and insects to spread their pollen.
If aaa lost half his brain it must have been the part that prevents
him from lying and misunderstanding the written word like isolated
system.
I personally define you an open system. Are you going to tell me that
the second law would not apply to you?
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
aaa
2018-01-06 07:44:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
..> > A DNA virus
..> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
..> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know there is a DNA virus. I should
have googled before I made my reply. However, even for a DNA virus, it
still has to rely on a host for its replication. So whether it's DNA
based or RNA based is not really important. The point is that it's not
capable of self-reproduction which raises the question whether it's
alive or not.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
..> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
..> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
..> > genetic material into your own DNA.
..> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
..> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
..> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
I think everybody agrees that there is a fundamental difference between
life and the lifeless. To find out whether viruses are alive or not
should help us better understand what life is. When we misunderstand
life, we might waste our own life by mistake.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
..> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
this.
Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.
Well, I happen to disagree. I believe life is the result of
consciousness. Only consciousness has the ability of self-improvement.
If there is no consciousness, there is no chance for self-improvement.
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-06 14:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
..> > A DNA virus
..> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
..> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know there is a DNA virus. I should
have googled before I made my reply. However, even for a DNA virus, it
still has to rely on a host for its replication. So whether it's DNA
based or RNA based is not really important. The point is that it's not
capable of self-reproduction which raises the question whether it's
alive or not.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
..> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
..> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
..> > genetic material into your own DNA.
..> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
..> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
..> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
I think everybody agrees that there is a fundamental difference between
life and the lifeless. To find out whether viruses are alive or not
should help us better understand what life is. When we misunderstand
life, we might waste our own life by mistake.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
..> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
/> > As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
/> > this.
/> > Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
/> > necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
/> > the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.
/> Well, I happen to disagree. I believe life is the result of
/> consciousness. Only consciousness has the ability of self-improvement.
/> If there is no consciousness, there is no chance for self-improvement.

Oh?

Meet Mycoplasma genitalium:

https://tinyurl.com/y7usbsvx

It's one of the smallest bacteria, and the second most simple
organism known, in the sense of having only 525 genes (we have ~25,000).

So you think this tiny bacterium is conscious?

Conscious, and capable of "self-improvement" to boot?

Do note that it is already very successful at what it does. And what
it does is to inhabit urinary and genital tracts, where it causes a variety
of effects, from pelvic inflammation to spontaneous abortions. And it's
quite successful at this, being notoriously resistant to antibiotics.

What would you say might constitute self-improvement for Mycoplasma genitalium?

And if you do think it's conscious, what would you imagine it thinks about,
nestled down there in the epithelial cells lining your urethra?


Sabine
Post by aaa
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
aaa
2018-01-07 03:45:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
..> > A DNA virus
..> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
..> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know there is a DNA virus. I should
have googled before I made my reply. However, even for a DNA virus, it
still has to rely on a host for its replication. So whether it's DNA
based or RNA based is not really important. The point is that it's not
capable of self-reproduction which raises the question whether it's
alive or not.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
..> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
..> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
..> > genetic material into your own DNA.
..> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
..> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
..> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
I think everybody agrees that there is a fundamental difference between
life and the lifeless. To find out whether viruses are alive or not
should help us better understand what life is. When we misunderstand
life, we might waste our own life by mistake.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
..> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
/> > As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
/> > this.
/> > Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
/> > necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
/> > the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.
/> Well, I happen to disagree. I believe life is the result of
/> consciousness. Only consciousness has the ability of self-improvement.
/> If there is no consciousness, there is no chance for self-improvement.
Oh?
https://tinyurl.com/y7usbsvx
It's one of the smallest bacteria, and the second most simple
organism known, in the sense of having only 525 genes (we have ~25,000).
So you think this tiny bacterium is conscious?
Yes. I have always maintained that bacteria are alive.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Conscious, and capable of "self-improvement" to boot?
Why not?
Post by s***@gmail.com
Do note that it is already very successful at what it does. And what
it does is to inhabit urinary and genital tracts, where it causes a variety
of effects, from pelvic inflammation to spontaneous abortions. And it's
quite successful at this, being notoriously resistant to antibiotics.
What would you say might constitute self-improvement for Mycoplasma genitalium?
And if you do think it's conscious, what would you imagine it thinks about,
nestled down there in the epithelial cells lining your urethra?
Consciousness operates on many levels. The human consciousness is not
the only consciousness. There are animal level of consciousness and
plant level of consciousness also. The bacteria consciousness should be
something in between the plant consciousness and the animal consciousness.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Sabine
Post by aaa
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
s***@gmail.com
2018-01-07 04:02:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
..> > A DNA virus
..> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
..> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know there is a DNA virus. I should
have googled before I made my reply. However, even for a DNA virus, it
still has to rely on a host for its replication. So whether it's DNA
based or RNA based is not really important. The point is that it's not
capable of self-reproduction which raises the question whether it's
alive or not.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery.
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
..> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
..> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
..> > genetic material into your own DNA.
..> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
..> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
..> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
I think everybody agrees that there is a fundamental difference between
life and the lifeless. To find out whether viruses are alive or not
should help us better understand what life is. When we misunderstand
life, we might waste our own life by mistake.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
..> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
/> > As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
/> > this.
/> > Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
/> > necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
/> > the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.
/> Well, I happen to disagree. I believe life is the result of
/> consciousness. Only consciousness has the ability of self-improvement.
/> If there is no consciousness, there is no chance for self-improvement.
/> > Oh?
/> > Meet Mycoplasma genitalium:
/> > https://tinyurl.com/y7usbsvx
/> > It's one of the smallest bacteria, and the second most simple
/> > organism known, in the sense of having only 525 genes (we have ~25,000).
/> > So you think this tiny bacterium is conscious?
/> Yes. I have always maintained that bacteria are alive.
/> > Conscious, and capable of "self-improvement" to boot?
/> Why not?

How would in improve itself? Become capable of infecting more
human tissue types than just the urinary and genital tracts maybe?
Liver, kidney?

Brain?

Or just become resistant to even more antibiotics?
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Do note that it is already very successful at what it does. And what
it does is to inhabit urinary and genital tracts, where it causes a variety
of effects, from pelvic inflammation to spontaneous abortions. And it's
quite successful at this, being notoriously resistant to antibiotics.
What would you say might constitute self-improvement for Mycoplasma genitalium?
/> > And if you do think it's conscious, what would you imagine it thinks about,
/> > nestled down there in the epithelial cells lining your urethra?
/> Consciousness operates on many levels. The human consciousness is not
/> the only consciousness. There are animal level of consciousness and
/> plant level of consciousness also. The bacteria consciousness should be
/> something in between the plant consciousness and the animal consciousness.

So, what is plant consciousness?

By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.

Interesting, eh?


Selene
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Sabine
Post by aaa
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
aaa
2018-01-07 09:35:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 9:56:30 PM UTC-6, Mitchell
Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control
the
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by aaa
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by a322x1n
human population.
Excellent!!! You will soon experience evolution first hand.
Odds are he got the same childhood vaccinations
we all did but refuses to admit it.
Since vaccination is only a medical procedure to assist and speed up
the
Post by aaa
human immune system's reaction to the possible viral infection, there
is
Post by aaa
no evolution as far as the human immune system is concerned. Since a
virus is never alive, it's not even life. Therefore, the change in
virus
Post by aaa
can not be considered as part of the evolution of life.
Viruses are not alive?
Say again?
Don't ask me. It's science. I learned that from scientists. Virus
doesn't have DNA.
Consider yourself corrected.
"All viruses have genes constructed from either
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid
(RNA)"
http://eol.org/info/458
The DNA part would be something for scientists to clarify. I did read
somewhere that says the exact opposite. If virus has its own DNA, it
would not need to invade a host for its own reproduction. So that
doesn't sound right to me.
That's because you need to read a bit more than "somewhere".
..> > A DNA virus
..> Apparently there are other scientists who disagree with such thing. I
..> don't have to get involved. You guys figure it out yourselves.
Scientists who disagree on what? No scientist disputes that there
are DNA based viruses and there are RNA based viruses. I have
no idea what you think is controversial.
Thanks for the information. I didn't know there is a DNA virus. I should
have googled before I made my reply. However, even for a DNA virus, it
still has to rely on a host for its replication. So whether it's DNA
based or RNA based is not really important. The point is that it's not
capable of self-reproduction which raises the question whether it's
alive or not.
Post by s***@gmail.com
needs a host to produce copies of its DNA because
Post by s***@gmail.com
a rather large number of cellular components are needed to
replicate the DNA. DNA polymerase -- as mentioned in the first
sentence there -- is one example. The host cell provides that.
The virus has none on its own, nor does it have any
of the other required enzymes. It's nothing more than
DNA in a wrapper. It co-opts the host cell's replication machinery..
Similarly for RNA viruses.
Post by aaa
The web page does talk about whether virus is alive, but I think there
are holes in it. First, the web page states: "Viruses are key in the
carbon cycle; their role in ocean biochemistry includes microbiological
metabolic—including decomposition—processes." So virus exists for the
decomposition of life forms. Its purpose is not life. It doesn't care
about life. It's only goal is to kill, and it doesn't have to care
whether itself is alive or not, or able to reproduce or not.
Viruses do not exist "for" anything. They have no "purpose".
You're right that "it doesn't care about life" -- it doesn't care about anything.
It has no "goal". Other than the one all organisms have: reproduce yourself.
If you don't, you go extinct.
..> > And by the way, many viruses do not kill. You have a number of them
..> > resident in your own body. And some of them have inserted their
..> > genetic material into your own DNA.
..> Since viruses don't demonstrate the self-preservation instinct which is
..> essential to a living entity, my argument stands. You need to
..> demonstrate otherwise to prove that viruses can be alive.
I don't know who you think you're responding to here, but I have
no stake in debating whether viruses are alive or not. They are what
they are and they do what they do. "Alive" is a matter of definition,
and there is no agreement on any definition. I've seen reference to
a book in which a number of prominent biologists were asked to
formulate a iron-clad definition of "life", and no two of them came
up with the same criteria.
I think everybody agrees that there is a fundamental difference between
life and the lifeless. To find out whether viruses are alive or not
should help us better understand what life is. When we misunderstand
life, we might waste our own life by mistake.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
That sounds like a terminator to me. In the human world, we call it the
crematorium. Does a crematorium have to be alive? I doubt it.
Second, the web page claims that virus is capable of self-replication.
That is obviously a false statement since it admits that virus relies on
the host cell to replicate itself.
Do you mean this sentence: "A DNA virus is a virus that has DNA as its genetic
material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase"?
If so, that merely says it replicates by taking over the host cell's
DNA copying machinery. It has none of its own.
..> As long as it can't replicate itself all by itself, it lacks the
,> essential characteristics of life. Life demonstrates itself as a living
,> entity capable of self-reproduction and self-improvement. Viruses
,> demonstrate none of them, therefore, they can't be alive.
/> > As I say above, you're apparently arguing with someone else about
/> > this.
/> > Though I will add that "being capable of self-improvement" is not
/> > necessary for something to be alive. Organisms occasionally hit
/> > the evolutionary jackpot, and can remain unchanged for eons.
/> Well, I happen to disagree. I believe life is the result of
/> consciousness. Only consciousness has the ability of self-improvement.
/> If there is no consciousness, there is no chance for self-improvement.
/> > Oh?
/> > https://tinyurl.com/y7usbsvx
/> > It's one of the smallest bacteria, and the second most simple
/> > organism known, in the sense of having only 525 genes (we have ~25,000).
/> > So you think this tiny bacterium is conscious?
/> Yes. I have always maintained that bacteria are alive.
/> > Conscious, and capable of "self-improvement" to boot?
/> Why not?
How would in improve itself? Become capable of infecting more
human tissue types than just the urinary and genital tracts maybe?
Liver, kidney?
Brain?
Or just become resistant to even more antibiotics?
Yes. Antibiotic resistance is the evidence that bacteria are capable to
improve themselves. It demonstrates the amazing ability of their
consciousness.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Do note that it is already very successful at what it does. And what
it does is to inhabit urinary and genital tracts, where it causes a variety
of effects, from pelvic inflammation to spontaneous abortions. And it's
quite successful at this, being notoriously resistant to antibiotics.
What would you say might constitute self-improvement for Mycoplasma genitalium?
/> > And if you do think it's conscious, what would you imagine it thinks about,
/> > nestled down there in the epithelial cells lining your urethra?
/> Consciousness operates on many levels. The human consciousness is not
/> the only consciousness. There are animal level of consciousness and
/> plant level of consciousness also. The bacteria consciousness should be
/> something in between the plant consciousness and the animal consciousness.
So, what is plant consciousness?
The plant consciousness makes photosynthesis possible. It's a process
that the human consciousness still can't fully understand let alone to
simulate. Otherwise, we would see a food replicator in every kitchen.
That should tell you how remarkable the plant consciousness is.
Post by s***@gmail.com
By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.
Interesting, eh?
Not much. Consciousness is not brain dependent. The brain is
consciousness dependent. For bacteria, when there are enough genes for
consciousness to operate and function, there is no reason that life
would not continue.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
Sabine
Post by aaa
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Sabine
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
I think the logic of your web page has some problems.
I think you need to read it more closely.
Dropping the teleology would be helpful too.
I did spend my time to debate a stupid webpage. I know I shouldn't have
done that.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by aaa
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2018-01-08 21:40:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
So, what is plant consciousness?
The plant consciousness makes photosynthesis possible. It's a process
that the human consciousness still can't fully understand let alone to
simulate. Otherwise, we would see a food replicator in every kitchen.
That should tell you how remarkable the plant consciousness is.
So plants have to think about photosynthesis while they
are doing it?

What are they thinking about... i mean, besides praying?

Do they talk to each other?

Is the whole plant conscious, or is it only happening at
the cellular level?
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.
Interesting, eh?
Not much. Consciousness is not brain dependent. The brain is
consciousness dependent. For bacteria, when there are enough genes for
consciousness to operate and function, there is no reason that life
would not continue.
You didn't understand what she just said. She said, if i
understand correctly, scientists manufactured a working
copy of Mycobacterium genitalium in the lab. They
created life.

I'm impressed.
Ted
2018-01-08 22:13:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
So, what is plant consciousness?
The plant consciousness makes photosynthesis possible. It's a process
that the human consciousness still can't fully understand let alone to
simulate. Otherwise, we would see a food replicator in every kitchen.
That should tell you how remarkable the plant consciousness is.
So plants have to think about photosynthesis while they
are doing it?
What are they thinking about... i mean, besides praying?
Do they talk to each other?
Is the whole plant conscious, or is it only happening at
the cellular level?
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.
Interesting, eh?
Not much. Consciousness is not brain dependent. The brain is
consciousness dependent. For bacteria, when there are enough genes for
consciousness to operate and function, there is no reason that life
would not continue.
You didn't understand what she just said. She said, if i
understand correctly, scientists manufactured a working
copy of Mycobacterium genitalium in the lab. They
created life.
I'm impressed.
That is pretty awesome.
aaa
2018-01-09 07:32:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
So, what is plant consciousness?
The plant consciousness makes photosynthesis possible. It's a process
that the human consciousness still can't fully understand let alone to
simulate. Otherwise, we would see a food replicator in every kitchen.
That should tell you how remarkable the plant consciousness is.
So plants have to think about photosynthesis while they
are doing it?
What are they thinking about... i mean, besides praying?
Do they talk to each other?
Is the whole plant conscious, or is it only happening at
the cellular level?
I don't think that plant can think. It should be a type of subconsciousness.
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.
Interesting, eh?
Not much. Consciousness is not brain dependent. The brain is
consciousness dependent. For bacteria, when there are enough genes for
consciousness to operate and function, there is no reason that life
would not continue.
You didn't understand what she just said. She said, if i
understand correctly, scientists manufactured a working
copy of Mycobacterium genitalium in the lab. They
created life.
I'm impressed.
That would be a misunderstanding if one can realize that life is only
the result of consciousness, and that consciousness can not be created
physically.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2018-01-09 10:37:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
So, what is plant consciousness?
The plant consciousness makes photosynthesis possible. It's a process
that the human consciousness still can't fully understand let alone to
simulate. Otherwise, we would see a food replicator in every kitchen.
That should tell you how remarkable the plant consciousness is.
So plants have to think about photosynthesis while they
are doing it?
What are they thinking about... i mean, besides praying?
Do they talk to each other?
Is the whole plant conscious, or is it only happening at
the cellular level?
I don't think that plant can think. It should be a type of subconsciousness.
Subconsciousness isn't consciousness.
Your theory is clearly flawed. Try again, it needs to
evolve.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by s***@gmail.com
By the way, Craig Venter's group analyzed the genome of Mycobacterium genitalium,
discarded several dozen genes that turned out to not be necessary ... and then based
on the rest, completely synthesized a new genome. Built it from the ground up, using
only chemicals. As in: built it from chemicals out of bottles. The resulting synthetic
DNA proved to be perfectly workable, resulting in a synthetic bacterium which
happily went about replicating itself, just as the non-synthetic one does.
Interesting, eh?
Not much. Consciousness is not brain dependent. The brain is
consciousness dependent. For bacteria, when there are enough genes for
consciousness to operate and function, there is no reason that life
would not continue.
You didn't understand what she just said. She said, if i
understand correctly, scientists manufactured a working
copy of Mycobacterium genitalium in the lab. They
created life.
I'm impressed.
That would be a misunderstanding if one can realize that life is only
the result of consciousness, and that consciousness can not be created
physically.
Your theory has been shown to be wrong.
Will you stick by it anyway?
Kevrob
2018-01-08 23:05:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
https://tinyurl.com/y7usbsvx
It's one of the smallest bacteria, and the second most simple
organism known, in the sense of having only 525 genes (we have ~25,000).
So you think this tiny bacterium is conscious?
Conscious, and capable of "self-improvement" to boot?
I think aaa/niunian is indulging animism, panantheism,* etc.
Typical Eastern religious hooey, though within the philosophical
tradition that comes down from the Greeks, the Neoplatonists went in
for it, too.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Do note that it is already very successful at what it does. And what
it does is to inhabit urinary and genital tracts, where it causes a variety
of effects, from pelvic inflammation to spontaneous abortions. And it's
quite successful at this, being notoriously resistant to antibiotics.
What would you say might constitute self-improvement for Mycoplasma genitalium?
And if you do think it's conscious, what would you imagine it thinks about,
nestled down there in the epithelial cells lining your urethra?
"Hmmmmm. Tastes.....salty."
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by aaa
The distinction between life and lifeless should not be blurred.
Kevin R

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
a322x1n
2018-01-01 11:49:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
aaa <***@somewhere.org> wrote in news:p2c54t$jea$***@dont-email.me:

<http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2014/12/19/intelligent-design-stil
l-dead/>

<http://tinyurl.com/kwyrtku>

<https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/A_Scientific_Dissent_From_Darwinism>

<http://tinyurl.com/y9k48wq4>

<https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2017/08/07/a-n-wilson-stale-unor
iginal-banal-cliche-ridden-hack/>

<http://tinyurl.com/ybu9u4et>

<http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2014/08/ken-hams-10-facts-tha
t-prove-creationism-debunked/>

<http://tinyurl.com/hor4bam>

Modern Christian: Someone who can take time
out from blasting evolution as "perpetrated fraud"
and "junk science" to demand the latest medical
advances from evolutionary biology be used on them
when THEY get sick.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District>

<http://tinyurl.com/bmxa4rc>

<https://sphericalbullshit.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/what-i-would-say-t
o-creationists-if-i-was-more-of-a-dick/>

<http://tinyurl.com/zascach>

<https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/philosop/creation.htm>

<http://tinyurl.com/kzzmt4g>

<http://www.skepticblog.org/2013/08/28/stephen-meyers-fumbling-bumbling
-amateur-cambrian-follies/>

<http://tinyurl.com/grmdhtv>

<http://americanloons.blogspot.com/search?q=stephen+myers>

<http://tinyurl.com/zlcp8u9>

<http://donaldprothero.com/quotes.html>

<http://tinyurl.com/hp2vd4v>

<http://americanloons.blogspot.com/search?q=Lee+Strobel%27s>

<http://tinyurl.com/zbl54ww>



<http://tinyurl.com/j9nkey5>

<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK6360/>

<http://tinyurl.com/zvyyhxn>

<http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/>

<http://tinyurl.com/c72j7wv>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_replication>

<http://tinyurl.com/goxgec9>

<https://edthemanicstreetpreacher.wordpress.com/2010/04/09/dawkins-ber
linski/>

<http://tinyurl.com/zmv3xf2>

<https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/feb/06/22-answe
rs-creationism-evolution-bill-nye-ken-ham-debate>

<http://tinyurl.com/hwjf83d>

<http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/dumb-things-creationists-
say/>

<http://tinyurl.com/zq9wt5k>

<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/magazine/unintelligent-design.html?_
r=0>

<http://tinyurl.com/h7ubjta>

<http://www.eoht.info/page/Creationism+scientists+ranked+by+idiocy>

<http://tinyurl.com/h5y2gao>

<https://www.chess.com/groups/forumview/18-creationist-arguments-debun
ked>

<http://tinyurl.com/zb7sfyr>

<http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Creationism>

<http://tinyurl.com/zt8dycq>

<https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/28/creation-origin-life-fu
ture-adam-rutherford-review>

<http://tinyurl.com/hsj6u6y>

<http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/06/07/what-do-physicists-t
hink-of-michio-kaku/>

<http://tinyurl.com/j32bskg>

<http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16>

<http://tinyurl.com/3p4e7mx>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin>

<http://tinyurl.com/jyzjfar>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel>

<http://tinyurl.com/pcqylyj>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution>

<http://tinyurl.com/7vw8ozk>

<http://www.famousscientists.org/charles-darwin/>

<http://tinyurl.com/jpr7p5v>

<http://darwin-online.org.uk/biography.html>

<http://tinyurl.com/5p6znj>

"Creation science" has not entered the curriculum for a reason so
simple and so basic that we often forget to mention it: because it is
false, and because good teachers understand exactly why it is false.
What could be more destructive of that most fragile yet most precious
commodity in our entire intellectual heritage -- good teaching -- than
a bill forcing honourable teachers to sully their sacred trust by
granting equal treatment to a doctrine not only known to be false, but
calculated to undermine any general understanding of science as an
enterprise? - Stephen Jay Gould.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould>

<http://tinyurl.com/jc3ckub>

<http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-human-evolution>

<http://tinyurl.com/jsalxfe>

<http://americanloons.blogspot.com/search?q=macarthur>

<http://tinyurl.com/jenrqkq>

<http://www.annualreviews.org/journal/ecolsys>

<http://tinyurl.com/z8o6zan>

<http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/home>

<http://tinyurl.com/pwg6fak>



<http://tinyurl.com/hy7xymb>

<http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Falldidit#Falldidit>

<http://tinyurl.com/z4z77ra
Christopher A. Lee
2018-01-01 13:58:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
v***@gmail.com
2018-01-01 17:58:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Yap Honghor
2018-01-02 01:04:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Isn't that the truth and nothing but the truth?
John Baker
2018-01-02 14:16:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
Post by Yap Honghor
Isn't that the truth and nothing but the truth?
Christopher A. Lee
2018-01-02 14:35:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Baker
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
I only say that when they clearly are. Which describes both the
Niunia/aaa loonie and the Mad Joe loonie.

Normal people don't seek out others to behave the way both these
loonies do, towards them.
Post by John Baker
Post by Yap Honghor
Isn't that the truth and nothing but the truth?
v***@gmail.com
2018-01-06 07:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by John Baker
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
I only say that when they clearly are. Which describes both the
Niunia/aaa loonie and the Mad Joe loonie.
Too bad you're not qualified to make that call.
"Insane" is not a medical term, but a legal one.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Normal people don't seek out others to behave the way both these
loonies do, towards them.
Like you commenting on more than 1/3 of my posts that were not addressed to you?
Yap Honghor
2018-01-07 03:14:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by John Baker
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
I only say that when they clearly are. Which describes both the
Niunia/aaa loonie and the Mad Joe loonie.
Too bad you're not qualified to make that call.
"Insane" is not a medical term, but a legal one.
So, you are guilty either in medical terms or the legal one.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Normal people don't seek out others to behave the way both these
loonies do, towards them.
Like you commenting on more than 1/3 of my posts that were not addressed to you?
He commented based on the response from others. I myself have explained this at least a few times, but you chose to ignore and pretend you cannot understand!!
v***@gmail.com
2018-01-06 08:13:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by John Baker
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
I only say that when they clearly are.
According to your posts, it's also "clear" that all theists are fundamentalists, all Roman Catholics are stupid, the USA is dominated by
religious fanatics, you can read people's minds and all people who disagree with you are being dishonest because they know you are right.
v***@gmail.com
2018-01-06 07:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Baker
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 17:04:34 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Well, it happens to be true, Artie. Especially when he says it about
you.
I'll take that as seriously as I do your other comments.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Kevrob
2018-01-02 01:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
When the person in question has reported he has survived a brain
injury, and complains there's no effective treatment for his
condition, it's a reasonable complaint.

What's your excuse for being a trolling, kvetching alter kocker?

Kevin R
hypatiab7
2018-01-05 06:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
When the person in question has reported he has survived a brain
injury, and complains there's no effective treatment for his
condition, it's a reasonable complaint.
What's your excuse for being a trolling, kvetching alter kocker?
That was niunian/aaa/bbb. This sounds like the original Zackie Mulletstein.
Christopher A. Lee
2018-01-05 12:06:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 22:45:44 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
Only when they clearly are - because normal people don't act that way.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
When the person in question has reported he has survived a brain
injury, and complains there's no effective treatment for his
condition, it's a reasonable complaint.
If he is aware that there is something wrong with himself due to brain
injusry, then he is also aware of what he is doing.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
What's your excuse for being a trolling, kvetching alter kocker?
In what passes for his mind he doesn't need one because it's all about
him.
Post by hypatiab7
That was niunian/aaa/bbb. This sounds like the original Zackie Mulletstein.
v***@gmail.com
2018-01-06 07:54:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
When the person in question has reported he has survived a brain
injury, and complains there's no effective treatment for his
condition, it's a reasonable complaint.
What's your excuse for being a trolling, kvetching alter kocker?
Kevin R
I don't need an excuse or approval from you for anything.
Kevrob
2018-01-08 22:51:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Niunian/aaa's obsession with lying about this repeatedly to atheists
even though it is nothing to do with atheism, shows he is certifiably
insane.
You say that about lots of people.
When the person in question has reported he has survived a brain
injury, and complains there's no effective treatment for his
condition, it's a reasonable complaint.
What's your excuse for being a trolling, kvetching alter kocker?
I don't need an excuse or approval from you for anything.
Of course you don't. And we don't need to respect you and your
trollish behavior, here.

Kevin R
Gronk
2018-01-05 05:17:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Nope, I do not take medication. I simply pray.
How does that work on a broken leg?
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Nope, vaccinations are full of manmade poisons meant to control the human population.
Examples?
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Post by Mitchell Holman
Then you believe in evolution.
No I don't. I believe that God created us. There is no such thing as evolution. We did not come from monkeys.
No one says that. The ones who do don't understand the matter.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-12-31 17:05:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:56:23 -0600, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Then you believe in evolution.
Not antibiotics per se - the doctor's lecture about taking the
complete course so all the critters are killed so those with _some_
resistance don't survive to pass it on, explains this phenomenon.

And not vaccinations per se. Older vaccines simply inject antibodies.
Many modern ones are specifically bioengineered, eg it's how we get
new influenza vaccines for new strains.

But be aware, Harrigon is an old troll, one of Zacky's many sock
puppets.
Mitchell Holman
2017-12-31 18:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:56:23 -0600, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Then you believe in evolution.
Not antibiotics per se - the doctor's lecture about taking the
complete course so all the critters are killed so those with _some_
resistance don't survive to pass it on, explains this phenomenon.
And not vaccinations per se. Older vaccines simply inject antibodies.
Many modern ones are specifically bioengineered, eg it's how we get
new influenza vaccines for new strains.
But be aware, Harrigon is an old troll, one of Zacky's many sock
puppets.
Immunology is a constant war between
microbes that evolve defenses to the old
serum requiring a new serum to be made.

And in the case TB there are strains
that have evolved defenses to ALL serums.
That is the scary bug, since you can get
infected just be being in the same room
with a patient. In contrast AIDS is
actually much harder to get.
Gronk
2018-01-05 05:13:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Ever taken an antibiotic?
Ever gotten a vaccination?
Then you believe in evolution.
Loading Image...

or

http://tinyurl.com/7poa2eq
Yap Honghor
2017-12-31 07:31:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Samuel Harrigon
do your goddamn research
Zachy and the evil religion are bullshits....
Post by Samuel Harrigon
Rev Samuel Harrigon
Good Old Gospel Ship Church
Loading...