Comments | jasonx10: (без темы)

jasonx10

(Untitled)

Dec 21, 2005 08:42

Dear proponents of mandating a one-sided view,If you are indeed intellectually honest as most of you claim, and you clearly understand the information entwined in your philosophy of evolution over creation, you must honestly admit to yourself that you accept it on faith (not logic). If you can show me proof of a complex biological organism ( Read more... )

Comments 31

jwinthehouse December 21 2005, 23:52:20 UTC

Its unfortunate. Are u surprised though? They been trying to get rid of God for years. I guess that just make our job a lot bigger to share about God with others & be the example.

ralphsink December 22 2005, 05:30:53 UTC

"If you can show me proof of a complex biological organism springing up from non-life"
Evolution doesn't address the issue of where living things come form.

"or a violation of the second law of thermodynamics"
Hmm, I don't think evoluation violates it.

One thing that really needs to happen is that proponents of ID need to stop making such a fuss over the word "theory." In science "theory" does not mean the same as "guess" or "hypothesis." http://wilstar.com/theories.htm
When people say "oooh! But evolution is a THEORY!!!!" they just sound silly.

I think science teachers should teach the controversy. I don't think a lot of time should be spent on it though.

jasonx10 December 22 2005, 12:09:39 UTC

Evolution doesn't address the issue of where living things come form.

Does it not try? Why was it first proposed?

"or a violation of the second law of thermodynamics"
Hmm, I don't think evoluation violates it.

I don't either. I should have clarified. I'm talking about abiogenesis, which, if im not mistaken, is taught as theory in many public schools (i remember it was in mine at least).

But evolution is a THEORY!!!!" they just sound silly.

prove to me that it is fact :) (in the very least, show me evidence)

xcircex December 23 2005, 01:10:19 UTC

what do you mean by your thing about violating the second law of thermodynamics? you then say you mean abiogenesis...is it your opinion that abiogenesis is a positive argument for our christian God? a little confused by what you mean here.

jasonx10 December 23 2005, 12:49:58 UTC

Nope. Not positive. I think abiogenesis tends to damage to the credibility of the bible.

2nd law of thermodynamics - things in the universe, when left to themselves tend to move progressively from order to disorder.

There needs to be a mechanism, some information, influencing something into a more ordered form.

Scientifically, we would need to radically go against this in some miraculous way to get from chemicals/non-life to a complex biological lifeform.

I realize this can be reconciled to genesis account of God's formation of man, but I think theres a problem when we start to say "look...science points toward old earth, so maybe we're incorrectly interpreting genesis and the word 'day' (yam or whatever in hebrew [not sure on spelling])...so that being said, maybe its not so farfetched to believe that God sortof naturally let things happen with abiogenesis and macro evolution and etc. etc." One man-made idea tends to lead to another, and rather than a practical-literal interpretation of genesis we adopt a man-made one, then to ( ... )

Thread 30