Originally posted by Penguin
From Wikipedia:


Since there is no unequivocal definition of life, the current understanding is descriptive. Life is considered a characteristic of organisms that exhibit all or most of the following- Adaptation: - Reproduction: .

Bananas!

Originally posted by Kepler
You and me both.

The Holy Bible says God made living things and God has life within Him. So at this point I guess only God really knows what life is. I am looking forward to being given eternal life by God. But as long as I can enjoy it, I will leave all the details up to God. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Holy Bible says God made living things and God has life within Him. So at this point I guess only God really knows what life is. I am looking forward to being given eternal life by God. But as long as I can enjoy it, I will leave all the details up to God. 😏

Bananas!!!

Originally posted by Penguin
From Wikipedia:

[i]
Since there is no unequivocal definition of life, the current understanding is descriptive. Life is considered a characteristic of organisms that exhibit all or most of the following:[29][31]

- Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to ...[text shortened]... ample viruses, that only do some of these things. Whether we call them 'alive' is debatable.

I'm glad somebody posted this. it may be a thread killer, but that's fine. This is not about whether Goddidit.

Originally posted by Penguin
So if it moves, grows, responds to it's environment and can reproduce, then it is probably alive. However, there are things, for example viruses, that only do some of these things. Whether we call them 'alive' is debatable.

The important thing to remember is that a definition is just a definition and doesn't bestow upon its object some magical properties. Whether or not we call a virus 'alive' does not in any way change the virus. Its only when someone attributes special properties to life beyond the definition that one runs into problems because now one must determine whether a virus is 'life' before one can know whether it should also have the additional attributes claimed.
Generally a scientist would never encounter this problem, as a scientist bases everything on observed evidence, whereas some theists will encounter this problem when for example they make the claim that life cannot come from non-life without intelligent input.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Bananas!!!

Kumquats!!!!

I think I prefer throwing fruit about to serious discussions with theists. Releases the inner chimp so to speak.

Raspberries!!! Long, wet ones for RJ.

Originally posted by Kepler
There is great deal of wrangling and squabbling over whether or not life is created or just happened, whether it evolves or all its various forms were there from the start. There is one thing missing from those discussions, a definition of life.

[b]What is life?

Before we can say much about a thing we have to know what it is. So, what is it that distinguishes a rock from a living organism? Is a virus alive and how do you know?[/b]

IDK but what i do know is that live is for living and rocks are for throwing at the atheist 🙂

Originally posted by tim88
IDK but what i do know is that live is for living and rocks are for throwing at the atheist 🙂

Yes, life is for living and not for bothering mythical sky fairies.

Originally posted by Kepler
Yes, life is for living and not for bothering mythical sky fairies.

OMG is not fairy 😠

Originally posted by tim88
OMG is not fairy 😠

Fairy, god, demon, all the same sort of mythical non-thing.

Originally posted by Kepler
Fairy, god, demon, all the same sort of mythical non-thing.

Can You Prove It? can you prove that god is a non thing? Mr Demonic Duck ?

Originally posted by tim88
Can You Prove It? can you prove that god is a non thing? Mr Demonic Duck ?

I don't have to. I don't believe it exists to start with. You, however, believe in the big grumpy sky fairy. If you want me to agree that the big grumpy sky fairy exists then you must present some evidence for its existence. I won't ask for proof since that would be impossible.

Originally posted by Kepler
I don't have to. I don't believe it exists to start with. You, however, believe in the big grumpy sky fairy. If you want me to agree that the big grumpy sky fairy exists then you must present some evidence for its existence. I won't ask for proof since that would be impossible.

I have evidence so prove me wrong bitxh

http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?subject=atheist_don%27t_want_you_to_see_this&threadid=152882

Originally posted by Kepler
I don't have to. I don't believe it exists to start with. You, however, believe in the big grumpy sky fairy. If you want me to agree that the big grumpy sky fairy exists then you must present some evidence for its existence. I won't ask for proof since that would be impossible.

So are you gonna quack all day little ducky or are you gonna bite me?

Originally posted by tim88
So are you gonna quack all day little ducky or are you gonna bite me?

Quack quack quackity quack.

You got something that one might call real evidence? I don't happen to agree that showing some connection between a book and the real world is evidence of a god of any kind. If you want to go that way then you must show some evidence that the book you are pulling the connections from is not just a work of fiction.