Pretty Well Sums It Up

[Elessar]

hmmm or maybe because they don't want to die from Polio... Did God make that Polio vaccine? You do realize that you are typing on a machine that implements hundreds of years of scientific theory, right?

Religion didn't need to come into this debate. You brought it in needlessly.

And you are all over the map...

Could not follow you if you were on a leash.

[aboutime]

And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?



In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?

pete. Little did you know how many of those same scientists would probably identify your problems as unknown, and a major cause of possible brain malfunction due to constant, personal feelings of being identified as a jerk. They call it something like a Lunar Happening.

[Russ]

And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?

In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

[Gunny]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

Here's MY favorite: How do you have a "Big Bang Theory" which creates something from nothing when scientific law says you cannot?

[Black Diamond]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

God will be proven not to exist. And then people will stand before him. It will be quite the sight to see.

[pete311]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

Man you guys are lame. When did this turn into a anti God thread? Gunny started the God crap. He was just ragging on scientific theory which has nothing to do with God. Please let's drop it.

The second law applies to a closed system. Are we living in a closed system? That is high school physics. You guys are like Jon Snow. You know nothing.

[pete311]

I say again: scientists are mere translators of a pre-set, designed, reality. They learn as they go. They're still learning, still building, still advancing

Regardless if it's preset design reality, scientists are still discovering it's process by the scientific method and theories. Do you think scientists get a tablet from a mountain every morning?

[darin]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

One thing - Thermodynamics is about energy - not about biology.

There are better arguments against macro evolution.

The best argument/common sense is this: IF thing magically 'evolved' from less-complicated organisms through cellular mutation - and the mutations/adaptions that were most-beneficial remained...please explain how a cell could mutate into a blood cell - and if many mutated into blood cells, did they do it before or after other cells mutated into veins and arteries and hearts and shit.

One thing magically morphing into another thing is fairy-tale shit. Common sense and logic dictates a designer. Apart from that - those who disagree, do so out of ego or fear.

[Russ]

Man you guys are lame. When did this turn into a anti God thread? Gunny started the God crap. He was just ragging on scientific theory which has nothing to do with God. Please let's drop it.

The second law applies to a closed system. Are we living in a closed system? That is high school physics. You guys are like Jon Snow. You know nothing.

The Earth as a whole can be considered a closed system, dummy.

Here is Planck's statement of the entropy law: "Every process occurring in nature proceeds in the sense in which the sum of the entropies of all bodies taking part in the process is increased."


The whole evolution theory, that a simple organism can evolve into a complex one, reminds me of a similar theory that if you had a million monkeys and a million typewriters, eventually just by random chance they would write all the great books. Or a corollary theory: if you had a million Pete311's and a million typewriters, eventually he would write all the great books. Call me a skeptic, but I don't think it would happen in either case.

( Given enough time, the monkeys might come close, though. )

[pete311]

The Earth as a whole can be considered a closed system, dummy.

Really? Nothing comes in, nothing goes out? Really?

In any case, using the earth as the system is not even appropriate since evolution doesn't factor in at that level. A more appropriate system to use where evolution is a factor is the human body. Now, ask yourself, is the human body a closed or open system. I'm getting hungry... and need to pee... hint hint.

[pete311]

reminds me of a similar theory that if you had a million monkeys and a million typewriters, eventually just by random chance they would write all the great books. Or a corollary theory: if you had a million Pete311's and a million typewriters, eventually he would write all the great books. Call me a skeptic, but I don't think it would happen in either case.

This is not a scientific theory. Do you know what a scientific theory is? I think you have many misconceptions.

[Kathianne]

This is not a scientific theory. Do you know what a scientific theory is? I think you have many misconceptions.

Good lord! Are you playing with a full deck?

[pete311]

Good lord! Are you playing with a full deck?

Exactly what is your problem? Russ mentions some "theories". I would love to read the paper on the million monkeys at a typewriter theory. Just give me the link to the study (scientific method). Sounds like rubbish to me and I bet he can't produce it, because it's not science.

I think what he is confusing is the infinite monkey theorem (different than a theory) which is a concept of infinity, where if a monkey is given infinite amount of time to type at a typewriter at some point he will write Shakespeare's Hamlet.

I still don't know how it has anything to do with the topic at hand.

[Drummond]

Regardless if it's preset design reality, scientists are still discovering it's process by the scientific method and theories. Do you think scientists get a tablet from a mountain every morning?

No. As I've said, they act to TRANSLATE their observations into coherent, logical reality. It's said that the Universe can be described mathematically. Therefore, what better proof of a designer of the Universe could you possibly have ?

[pete311]

No. As I've said, they act to TRANSLATE their observations into coherent, logical reality. It's said that the Universe can be described mathematically. Therefore, what better proof of a designer of the Universe could you possibly have ?

When did this turn into an intelligent design debate, because I never entered into one. Scientists use the scientific method to develop their theories. That is fact. I don't know what else this debate is about.