Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Yup Evolution Is On Shakey Ground... Bloody House Of Cards

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by S.H. Le on April 8, 2000 00:33:02 UTC

Here we go again... sigh indeed.

How can order be derived from disorder? I dunno... snowflakes and tornadoes seem to be spontaneous so called "violations" to the second law of thermodynamics. In such cases, entropy actually decreases. Does God actually actively regulate the creation of snowflakes? I don`t think we need God to explain that kind of phenomenon.

Yes, entropy does apply to both open and closed systems, but it`s completely false to believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics suggests that entropy must always increase in every reaction, because it doesn`t. We can see that purely from observation from nature. Only in a closed system can entropy really be expected to increase.

Well i wouldn`t say creationists are irritating because their theories are vastly superior, it`s because you all use the exact same arguments based on the same misconceptions. When you decide to correct them, they just don`t listen and carry on like you haven`t said anything at all.
Yup, the creationist would have you believe that the two disciplines of physics and biology are battling it out to the death. Sorry, it isn`t so... evolution doesn`t violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics... and neither do snowflakes.

It`s funny how they use physics to support their ideas in one case, but contradict the discipline in other cases. Naturally the 2nd law of thermodynamics is infallable... but radiometric isotopic dating methods are totally wrong. Why? because the world is only a few thousand years old. why? because it says so in the bible. You can only take literal interpretations so far.

The bible says that God is a man, and man is created in God`s image. Well does God have skin, intestines, hair, or even a penis? why else would u call him a man? Why would he need a penis? Does he have sex? why? Of course these are hopelessly retarded questions, but they only arise from retarded reading of the bible.

Furthermore, it`s not entirely that creationists criticise evolution (and badly i might add), its that they propose a very elaborate creation story for the earth. So when told that the bible contains innumerable cases where the most fundamental physical laws are violated (including the all favorite 2nd law of thermodynamics) creationists are forced to retreat to the supernatural "god is outside these laws and can therefore do anything miraculously" retort. Then they throw in stuff about faith to boot.

Sorry, no self respecting science is capable of taking that seriously. The scientist assumes that there will be physical explanations for certain mechanisms and looks for them... the "it was created at a wave of a hand just because" theory doesn`t cut it i`m afraid. It`s called the scientific method... science unearths the "how" of things. Religion, philosophy, and 1-900 psychic hot lines have cornered the "why" department.

Nothing particularly wrong with that of course... just don`t try to pass of the "why" as scientifically accurate.

Can we move on now?

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins