Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Science Icon Fires Broadside At Creationists
London Times vis The Statesman (India) ^ | 04 July 2004 | Times of London Editorial

Posted on 07/04/2004 5:19:27 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 1,201-1,207 next last
To: MacDorcha
the Earth is a closed system

Do you not believe that energy from the Sun gets to the Earth?

401 posted on 07/06/2004 5:13:12 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA

There does seem to be rampant ignorance (or malice) about thermodynamics among Creationists. By their logic, even simple reactions would not take place.


402 posted on 07/06/2004 5:16:40 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Not that it matters since Jude doesn't even know the difference between 6 and 7

A PhD. had a flat tire. When he removed the flat he placed the lug nuts in the hub cap. While leveraging the spare into place he bumped the hub cap and spilled the 4 lug nuts down a storm drain. He could not reach the fallen lugs down the deep drain. As the PhD. was sitting with head in hands, trying to come up with contingencies for retrieving the lugs, a Christian happened by. Seeing the sadness of the Prof he questioned him about his dilemma.

Looking at the drain and seeing that there was no manhole cover nearby, the Christian quickly reasoned that the best course of action was to remove a single lug nut from the other three tires to use with the spare. Then drive to an auto-supply store to replace the four missing lugs.

1 Adam-->2 Seth-->3 Enos-->4 Cainan--->5 Mahalaleel--->6 Jared-->7 Enoch.

Adam is the first generation. Enoch is the seventh generation after Adam's.

Hope this helps.

403 posted on 07/06/2004 5:24:48 PM PDT by bondserv (Alignment is critical!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
1 Adam-->2 Seth-->3 Enos-->4 Cainan--->5 Mahalaleel--->6 Jared-->7 Enoch. Adam is the first generation. Enoch is the seventh generation after Adam's.

Well, no wonder our species is so screwed up after all that inbreeding!

404 posted on 07/06/2004 5:30:36 PM PDT by balrog666 (A public service post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

point. that was something i had forgotten to account. still though, you profess there is no such thing as a closed system. how?


405 posted on 07/06/2004 5:34:21 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Well, no wonder our species is so screwed up after all that inbreeding!

My issues are well documented, and yes it may trace back to my ancestors who thankfully weren't apes. (Minimal hair on my back and all, thinning on top unlike your ancestors too).

Long time no chat, former Lord of Moria! Mithrandir, my Hero! :-)

406 posted on 07/06/2004 5:38:06 PM PDT by bondserv (Alignment is critical!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Well no because it says "After"

Now Enoch, who lived seven generations after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said,

For example, I am the second generation after or from my grandfather. He doesn't count and it doesn't make sense as #1 because that would mean he is the first generation after himself?

The KJV uses from instead of after but it the same thing.

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these

Anyhow your point is moot because Enoch's supposed prophecy here comes from his Book of Enoch which is not part of the Bible and all Christian denominations (besides the Ethiopian Orthodox) don't recognize it as divinely inspired

407 posted on 07/06/2004 5:44:39 PM PDT by qam1 (Tommy Thompson is a Fat-tubby, Fascist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

When I heard this story, the guy with the flat tire was a physicist and the guy who came up with the solution was a loony calling down instructions from the windows of an asylum (the punchline was "I may be crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm stupid"). I find it interesting you substituted a Christian for the loony.


408 posted on 07/06/2004 5:45:56 PM PDT by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: qam1; balrog666

hey, newsflash! as stated before, the geneology list is NOT exhaustive!

also, the same translation error can occur here as well as "days= period of time"

1000 or 10,000, the idea is "large number"

and a "saint" is one who is deemed holy, so where your discrepancy there is, im lost.

also, to balrog (the irreverant)

evolutionists state we all came from one cell that split. these means we are all related either way. deal with it.


409 posted on 07/06/2004 5:46:50 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
There does seem to be rampant ignorance (or malice) about thermodynamics among Creationists.

So he forgot the sun. Picky, picky!

410 posted on 07/06/2004 5:48:58 PM PDT by VadeRetro (You don't just bat those big liquid eyes and I start noticing how lovely you are. Hah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

thermodynamics isnt even the issue, its the actions of atoms and how they react. thermodynamics is a step from that.

what would cause atoms to fuse until they "lived"?

why cant we replicate it? even if one day we do replicate it, when will we start forming matter from energy?

if all we are is chance, a controlled lab should be able to mimic it. of course, then there is still the pesky "where did energy itself come from?"

Big bang you say? or some equivelant? what was the origin of that?

all signs point to God.


411 posted on 07/06/2004 5:52:11 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

are you going to state that there is no such thing as a close system as well? i thought the closed system was ideal for the Big Bang theory. or any theory professing a lack of an ultimate will.


412 posted on 07/06/2004 5:56:19 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha

these-this, blah. im tired of writing, of the 60 odd posts, ive also typed an 8 page essay for psychology. mind's going blah.


413 posted on 07/06/2004 5:58:34 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus

Since I didn't write the quote you reference, you might want to go back to the entry and reply to whoever did write it. Sorry


414 posted on 07/06/2004 6:08:13 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Secularization of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

Truly a memorable thread. Placemarker.


415 posted on 07/06/2004 6:56:05 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Hic amor, haec patria est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha
according to evolutionists, "Creationism" is a theory.

False. It's a hypothesis. It will not become a theory until there are criteria for testing it.

For example, standard biology predicts that any pseudogene, transposon, etc, found in the genome of a single species of cat and also in a single species of dog will be found in all species of cat, all species of dog, and also all species of bear.

Until ID or creationism is capable of making detailed predictions like this, they remain mere armchair speculation, not science.

BTW if this prediction (or any one of thousands similar to it) were experimentally found to be false, major changes in either the phyoggenetic tree, or the ToE, or both, would be necessary. What observations would show that ID or creationism had to be seriously revised?

416 posted on 07/06/2004 7:02:49 PM PDT by Virginia-American (What do you call an honest creationist? An evolutionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha
evolutionists state we all came from one cell that split. these means we are all related either way. deal with it.

Um, no, not exactly. Try again after reading a book.

I think that if you had paid as much attention to your English teachers as your Biology teachers you would be a much better person. Punctuation is your friend - learn it, live it, exploit it!

417 posted on 07/06/2004 7:15:12 PM PDT by balrog666 (A public service post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
At least explain to me how you "square" abiogenesis with the Second Law of Thermodynamics

What, precisely, is the problem? Have you or anyone else actually computed the entropy of a world with living things, and one without? How does this value compare with the increase in entropy csused by energy moving through the system?

418 posted on 07/06/2004 7:22:47 PM PDT by Virginia-American (What do you call an honest creationist? An evolutionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

i simply refuse to do so. you catch my drift most of the time, and if you don't? tough, not my problem on this site to break things down so you can enjoy it through a sippy cup.

and "uhm, yes, exactly"

if the hypothesis that we came from primordial ooze is correct, shouldnt this planet be producing new life forms all the time? why would primordial ooze become extinct? there must be life-spewing ooze now if there was any at all.

the fact that this planet is devoid of such ooze implies that if it was the origin, it was limited. also, the presence of the ooze was such a chaotic chance that i doubt after the first happening, that it happend twice on the same planet (or even solar system).

after that conclusion, it is hard to see how more than one cell could have also happend purely by chance in the same pool. this cell was imbued with a first ever thing (aside from life itself) the ability to replicate its self. no matter could do that. the problem was, the copy was imperfect, but many could be made.

given the sheer chances, id say its quite giving of me to just even assume primordial ooze formed. let alone originated life.


419 posted on 07/06/2004 7:32:45 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: Junior

Some people can't help repeating the same joke over and over and over and over and over to the same audience.


420 posted on 07/06/2004 7:42:22 PM PDT by js1138 (In a minute there is time, for decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse. J Forbes Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 1,201-1,207 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson