lol, I responded to you when I thought you might actualy have a brain, but after listening to your vids, I see you are just a nut job. lol

I will be sure to respond to you as I would to an uninformed spoiled child.

Thanks for all the support. You totally rock. sonic

thanks a lot for the sub i appreciate it. - Kyle

Who is this "Dave"?

I assure you that he is a false prophet if he refuses to show you the true path to eternal slack, hot sex, and riches beyond your dreams. If this "Dave" (if he even exists) doesn't help you along the path to slack, he is most likely a PINK BOY, a tool of the conspiracy. It would be wise to shun him. Send me $20 American Dollars and I will explain how.

Praise "BOB"!
Eternal salvation or TRIPLE YOUR MONEY BACK!

Abiogenesis would be funny if it wasn't so sad. That quote said nothing other than complex structures can come together randomly. Randomly generated complexity is not something that I have a problem with at all- check out crystal structures.
The problem with abiogenesis is that the structures that were created were a result intelligent scientists trying to make biochemicals in a lab. That's intelligent design!

Also, these biochemicals were removed from the water, because hydrolysis would break down the hydrogen bonds.
This is what would completely prevent the formation of RNA or DNA.
Life, hypothetically, originated in primordial seas, but the conditions of these primordial seas to not allow for it.
Also, there is no way to know what the environment was like on the early earth, and the chemicals hypothesized are assumptions about what could make life violate the law of biogenesis- which is contradictory all by itself.

Using answersingenesis as a source? The only time that I can recall using AiG as a source recently is the biblically based timeline.
And AiG didn't even come up with it. It was re-published by AiG, after Ussher.
And if my scientific arguments are valid, why does it matter if it comes from AiG?

Due to your lack of response on the antibiotic resistant bacterium, ostrich's wings and other vestigial structures, I am assuming you have no problem with the answers I've given.

The vestigial structures explanations come from personal research.
And the penicillin-resistant bacteria comes from a book written by Jonathan Sarafati, and has been confirmed by secular and creation scientists.

Cool channel
xD

There is a beneficial mutation concerning the penicillin, yes. This is, however, a destruction of genetic information that is beneficial.
Bacteria usually produce an enzyme, penicillinase, which destroys penicillin. The amount of penicillinase is controlled by a gene, which normally provides enough to destroy normal amounts of penicillin found in the wild.
A mutation disabled the controlling gene caused the bacteria to produce a large amount of penicillinase, making to resistant to penicillin.
It was the loss of the controlling gene's function that made the bacteria resistant to penicillin. It wasn't evolution.
Normally this mutation would not have been selected for, because it would have been wasteful to produce so much penicillinase.

Let's make a deal. I will stop talking about abiogenesis (i know, it's a sore subject) if you stop pretending that certain things are mysteries "to those who believe in an intelligent designer."

For the most part, antibiotic resistant bacteria is nothing more than natural selection, weeding out the bacteria that did not have the resistance to begin with. This eventually leads to a more well-adapted, antibiotic-resistant population of bacteria. Any biology text book will confirm this.

The reason I bring up abiogenesis is because evolution relies completely on naturalism. If the origin of the first cell cannot be explained naturally, maybe naturalism is not the way to go!
The ostrich wing is not vestigial, at all.
They are used for balance, heat-maintenance, rib protection, defense, and mating rituals.

If you are going to argue vestigial structures, do some research first- don't just quote Gould. I guess he didn't do his research on the functions of an ostrich's wings either.
And please don't mention the human appendix, male nipples, human tailbone, or the pelvic bones in whales.
Feel free to mention the cave-dwelling fish with vestigial eyes- but I don't know why you would. I have no problem with that LOSS of genetic information.