Golgi Apparatus

-Removed-

It's just a fancy micelle of grease. You make those by dripping oily stuff into water.

-Removed-

Why make one when you can harvest them? I believe most cells have them in.

Or are you planning a synthetic cell project?

-Removed-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

-Removed-

Are you talking about this?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golgi_apparatus

-Removed-

No.

Creationist claims science doesn't have an answer for something, and concludes that God did it - Creationist is using the fallacious 'argument from incredulity'.

Creationist doesn't have an explanation for something, but science does, - creationist is rejecting science for religious reasons.

So, are you going to tell us the point of this thread? Were you just trying to prove that science doesn't know everything yet? I don't think anyone will dispute that.

-Removed-

Where have you seen anyone (other than Dasa) claim to 'know it all'?
Where have you seen anyone claim that what science does not know should not been questioned?
Where did I or JS357 demonstrate this?

Maybe the problem is that I do not understand the question. What is your question with regards to my (and according to Wikipedia, science's) ignorance of how to make a Golgi Apparatus?

Did you read the link given regarding the "Argument from Incredulity"?

-Removed-

So your real argument goes Creationism is the only way life could have started and developed here on Earth. You really have no interest in actually constructing Golgi's.
I think they call that the strawman argument.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So your real argument goes Creationism is the only way life could have started and developed here on Earth. You really have no interest in actually constructing Golgi's.
I think they call that the strawman argument.

How about the endoplasmic reticulum?

Originally posted by RJHinds
How about the endoplasmic reticulum?

Been googling again?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Been googling again?

Yep. I can do that too.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yep. I can do that too.

Wow, so you bring up all the things science cannot do at this time and use that as an argument that everything science has to say is totally off the wall. That is like chiding a 3 year old for not being able to do calculus.

Come back in a couple hundred years and see how much science can do, THEN give that argument again.

You do realize science in general is only a few hundred years old, right? That scientists have a lot more to learn and will learn in the future, right? That science is a work in progress?

For instance, scientists cannot make a spacecraft go anything like the speed of light, but would you like to bet that within 200 years or so we might be able to do just that?