Subject:
|
Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:32:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
623 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ryan Farrington writes:
> Bruce Schlickbernd:
> > This is the same old Creationist dodge: (X) scientific theory isn't PROVEN
> > (nothing is in science - it simply shows you don't understand science when
> > you say such things) so it's just as much an article of faith as religion.
> > Except one is based on observation and application of the evidence at • hand,
> > and the other doesn't depend on it at all. It DOES mean that you hold the
> > mutually exclusive position that science can't prove anything while
> > simultaneously attempting to use science to prove your point when it suits
> > you. Then why ever bring up scientific "proofs" of Creationism? You have • to
> > accept that one of your arguments is specious by definition.
>
>
> Evidence I gave did not *prove* creation, nor did I say that it did. But
> the evidence can *support* creationism. Here's a few premises:
>
> Facts exist
> Man discovers facts using the scientific method
> Evolutionists say these facts fit the evolution model
> Creationsists say these facts fit the creation model
I would modify this as follows:
Facts Exist
Man form hypotheses and theories which he tests via the scientific method
Evolutionists find that their hypotheses do not always fit the facts, so
they re-evaluate and re-formulate those hypotheses
Creationists deny, subvert, and alter facts to fit the Creation model
> Observation (A) clearly says entropy (B) must be true.
> The evolution model (C) describes a condition where B is false.
> Therefore the evolution model (C) is false. (Or our observation is grossly
> wrong!)
Your conclusion is flatly incorrect and misinformed. As long as the Sun
is putting out huge amounts of energy, and thereby increasing entropy by
leaps and bounds, the tiny and localized increases in order that we see in
evolution are well within the parameters of the 2nd law.
> Also consider DNA. DNA is such a detailed and comprehensive code,
> containing enormous amounts of information that has, according to
> evolutionist scientists, come about by natural processes.
Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins for a thorough treatment of
a evolutionary model in which no divine creator is needed.
> (1)"No exception to the second law of thermodynamics has ever been
> found--not even a tiny one. Like conservation of energy (the 'first law'),
> the existence of a law so precise and so independent of details of models
> must have a logical foundation that is independent of the fact that matter
> is composed of interacting particles." (E.G. Lieb and Jakob Yngvason, "A
> Fresh Look at Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics," _Physics
> Today_, vol. 53, April 2000, page 32)
This is a nice citation, but it is out of context and incomplete. Your
quote does not say "therefore evolution is false," because evolution, like
everything else, conforms to the 2nd Law.
Your misunderstanding of this basic point is further illustration that
your grasp of basic scientific principles is incomplete. That's not a
character flaw, but it does indicate that your conclusions--based on your
incorrect or incomplete understanding of these principles--are not entirely
reliable. Bruce has elsewhere mentioned that Creationists exploit the
public's misunderstanding of science, and such posts as the one to which I
am replying clearly demonstrate that Bruce's assertion is correct.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
| Bruce Schlickbernd: (...) hand, (...) to (...) Evidence I gave did not *prove* creation, nor did I say that it did. But the evidence can *support* creationism. Here's a few premises: Facts exist Man discovers facts using the scientific method (...) (24 years ago, 6-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
126 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
