Evolution v. Creationism

[Hollie]

Does science have a theory or hypothesis about extraterrestrial life?

Someone or something had to create stuff that was created.

Scientists will follow the evidence where it leads regarding extraterrestrial life.

What evidence leads to supernatural gods?

 

[Hollie]

It's what the overwhelming evidence says. Recall the expression, "You can't get here from there"? Apply that to evolution.

What overwhelming evidence?

 

[Hollie]

Gray's Anatomy was authored by scientist(s). He/they unwittingly support creation by revealing complexities not possible through evolution.

What complexity is not possible through evolution? What example of complexity can you present which was the result of supernatural gods?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Because the laws of nature existed before space and time and because the presence of matter/energy creates its own space and time and is subject to change so matter/energy cannot be an eternal source. So the only thing that can exist eternally (i.e. unchanging) is no thing. Consciousness is no thing.

That's a word game.

 

[Hollie]

Behind the scenes evolutionists are frantically trying to fill the holes in the theory. That's why they only deal in 'macro' changes. They are scared spitless to look any deeper.

I'm not aware what scenes evolutionists are behind. Can you give a few examples of frantic evolutionists behind the scenes?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

Just because something had a beginning does not mean you know what it was.

 

[ding]

That's a word game.

It's a combination of science and logic. It might help if you accepted the science that the universe was created from nothing.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You have no more basis for considering the existence of matter without its complementary aspect of mind, than for asking that elementary particles not also be waves. If I say, with Eddington, “the stuff of the world is mind‑stuff,” that has a metaphysical ring. But if I say that ultimate reality is expressed in the solutions of the equations of quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, and quantum field theory -- that sounds like good, modern physics. Yet what are those equations, indeed what is mathematics, but mind‑stuff? Matter from mind is the ultimate in mind‑stuff and for that reason deeply mysterious.

Could you define "Mind stuff"? It will ease the conversation. What is it exactly?

 

[ding]

Just because something had a beginning does not mean you know what it was.

The spontaneous creation of the universe from nothing

 

[ding]

Could you define "Mind stuff"? It will ease the conversation. What is it exactly?

consciousness

 

[Woodznutz]

Actually my point was exactly that. Their sense of their relationship with their God is threatened by Evolution. Which is why it isn't really all that important for most Christians.

It gives some of us the warm fuzzies though.

 

[Woodznutz]

What complexity is not possible through evolution? What example of complexity can you present which was the result of supernatural gods?

The utter impossibility of that complexity via evolution. Just construct a chain of events that must occur before even the smallest evolutionary change can take place and you'll have your answer.

 

[Hollie]

The utter impossibility of that complexity via evolution. Just construct a chain of events that must occur before even the smallest evolutionary change can take place and you'll have your answer.

What chain of events are utterly impossible?

 

[Woodznutz]

I'm not aware what scenes evolutionists are behind. Can you give a few examples of frantic evolutionists behind the scenes?

I can give you an overview. Scientists release various evolutionary hypotheses to the public before they have gathered enough evidence to support them. And the believing public swallows it without a second thought.

 

[Woodznutz]

What chain of events are utterly impossible?

Ask an evolutionary scientist about it. I think the answers will surprise you. There are more links missing from their chain of evidence than supporting ones.

 

[Hollie]

I can give you an overview. Scientists release various evolutionary hypotheses to the public before they have gathered enough evidence to support them. And the believing public swallows it without a second thought.

Example?

 

[Hollie]

Ask an evolutionary scientist about it. I think the answers will surprise you. There are more links missing from their chain of evidence than supporting ones.

I would be surprised. What missing links should I ask an evolutionary scientist about?

 

[Woodznutz]

Example?

Just examine some of the things said by them that you believe without question. Such articles are replete with the statement, "Evolutionists now believe...." And many times it's a departure from what they previously believed about the subject. We can't keep up with them.

 

[Woodznutz]

I would be surprised. What missing links should I ask an evolutionary scientist about?

The biological steps, including at the molecular and genetic level, needed for any change to occur in an organism. Those necessary links are usually missing.

 

[james bond]

You are wrong and you know this very well when you take a look at the hand of a gorilla and your own hand and ask yourselve where this similarity could come from. And no Christian ever asked you to defend god and his creation against his children and their evolution. That's totally weird.





We human beings are not only the beneficiaries but also the stewards of other creatures. Thanks to our bodies, God has joined us so closely to the world around us that we can feel the desertification of the soil almost as a physical ailment, and the extinction of a species as a painful disfigurement. Let us not leave in our wake a swath of destruction and death which will affect our own lives and those of future generations.
Pope Francis

How can I be wrong if I quote the Bible correctly in regards to creation science? Now, you can point out my error if you know creation science, but it appears you don't have any clue.

ETA: Can you provide what today's evolutionists have in terms of evidence? You've never provided any science papers for your gorilla hands nor anything else in recent memory.