Here are a few debates I brought up and created myself using the laws of Physics and logic... I originally wrote this for someone else, so if there are references to his name, my bad.
The Big Bang Theory
The traditional theory that two atoms/ matter/ electrons collided together and caused a enormous explosion. Due to this explosion dust was created that the began to settle around the universe. It was spun into action with the right chemistry to create the sun, then dust collected in balls and got caught within the gravitational pull of the sun and became what we know of as our planets... This is going of the grounds, of the creation of our solar system under such a theory alone. Apart, that is, form the creation of the rest of the universe... This is known as the Big Bang theory, brought about by Charles Darwin, who invented the rest of the theory of evolution.
Refute
This may seem as a nice way to write off any form of creation, for it just all exploded into place. But just looking first at the two particles. According to this theory they floated around in space for billions and billions of years.. Or the void we know as space. Yet if you look at the laws of physics, this cannot be so. For the energy of these two particles would have worn out many eons before they ever met, and therefore would have caused no explosion. yet for a time let us imagine they did, and said explosion did take place...
The nature of an explosion is of such that it never creates life. Never has something exploded into something completely different. And looking even into the blasts of the atomic bombs. Explosions always cause degeneration, never generation, or life. Therefore such an explosion on that magnitude would have destroyed any hope for life on any planet. And with that, the life of the stars. They are composed of many elements and chemicals. Yet only one or two caused the explosion. And even broken down they would not have created enough to form a star, then charge it with so much force as to cause it to light.
With the theory at that of the dust settling, you may note that there is no gravity in space. Only that which is emitted by other objects, and since no other objects were around, the matter itself would have never settled, nor the dust, nor anything for that matter. It would have been given such a thrust that the force of the explosion would send it out into the deep recesses of space, and they would have never slowed down because no gravity existed.
Cycle of the Universe
This title sounds as though it would make a good horror movie, or some sci-fi flick. Yet let's look at it this way. Obviously this would state that the universe has had no beginning, but has kept renewing itself through all the ages of eternity. With what would it renew itself? For the laws of science say that natural systems left to themselves decay and grow old. Yet there had to have been some kind of renewing source, or stars would have burnt themselves out. gases would all have expanded and exploded and grown dim, since time itself would not exist, for everything has always been. And explosion would cause such a force as to destroy the old universe, which would bring in the new on (regarding that the original Big Bang theory were correct). And at that, with what would the universe come to knowledge that it needed to be renewed? Ad who would flip the switch that would renew it?
Even at the beginning that never was under this theory, everything would have been left to itself and would have ran itself out... And under this there would have been nothing of such a force to cause such an explosion to renew...
Earth
Ok let's say that the explosion under either theory was able to work. And hung in space you had the fresh planet earth. Though we could stop here for just a minute and point something out. The sun is gases and therefore burs itself away, as does any star. it has been recorded that the sun loses about five feet every hour. Well judging the distance between the earth and the sun, and factor in time. You would have the sun much larger then it is now, and to the point that the earth would be engulfed in that inferno.. therefore causing a major riff in that theory....
But let's go on and say the sun has always been the same size, and therefore did not scorch the world into nothing.... Then you have to deal with the second major step in the beginning process of evolution about how life was formed. Plant life for that matter. Which is something I cannot answer, for I have never heard an evolutionist speak about how plant life form.. And them saying that it seemingly went un-altered....
The Creatures
Men have seemingly come to an agreement on this matter that, in the dawning days of the world, there was a great pool of slime. Where this slime comes from they will not say. One theory says a particle fell into this slime and a creature came out, another says, that these fishy creatures evolved and then came out as this walking fish creature. Another still says (most widely held) that all life developed from a single-celled organism that evolved. Well for that single-cell organism would be made up of hundreds, in not thousands of proteins. And science has made the estimation that the probability of one protein evolving is. 1 to the 47,000,000 power (something along those lines). Which matched up to that you would have better chances of walking down the street and finding the winning ticket to the Georgia lottery (several hundred million dollars) laying on the curb. And doing the same thing, every time that it came, for the next 10,000 years... Or taking one atom, and releasing it at random into the universe, then going through all space. And grabbing only once, and catching the one atom, BLINDFOLDED... Those are the odds.
Yet this little single-celled creature would stay a single-celled creature, for it would see no need, nor have any blueprint to change into anything else. That is only on the grounds that it evolved a brain, or a sense of logic.
But say they were right and this little creature made I along far enough to come out of the water as some sort of fish-man there would be even more troubles to explain. Why did it come out? How did it reproduce after itself? Why did it change to have legs, if it could have formed something else?
The first creatures would not need any need of sex of reproduce after themselves. Nor would they develop it, for thy would just evolve or grow to suit there needs. Evolution has et to explain this mystery away... Yet this little creature devolved. It would it branch into different kinds of animals? I have not seen polar bears coming to the beaches of Florida.. No, it would be plenty content where it was, and would see no need to go farther out into the world. For it would have no drive to go into the great unknown.
This fish creature, is at best a myth, based on a few logically questions... There are more, but I will stop here..
The Dinosaurs
Let's say creatures made it far enough to the dinosaurs... Well what happened to them. There are several theories. The main one you'll read is that a meteor hint the earth and created a dust storm. Wouldn't we see the effects of said meteor today? They say the crater in Flagstaff, Arizona was probably about the size of a house. A rock the size of a house landing in the ocean is said to have an extreme effect on the world, though one has not. If it was enough to kill all the dinosaurs.. Then where is the marking? And why did only the dinosaurs die?
Now explain this? If the Bible is all false, and there was no flood, then why is the ark on Mt. Ararat? Why are their fish at the tops of the mountains in the Swiss Alps? Why is the fossil record go in this pattern from fossils found the deepest to the nearest to the surface. Sails and slow creatures - Dinosaurs - Horses and such animals - And man is last..... nearest.. As if they were running from a giant mud slide?
In Christ Alone,
Lyle
The Big Bang Theory
The traditional theory that two atoms/ matter/ electrons collided together and caused a enormous explosion. Due to this explosion dust was created that the began to settle around the universe. It was spun into action with the right chemistry to create the sun, then dust collected in balls and got caught within the gravitational pull of the sun and became what we know of as our planets... This is going of the grounds, of the creation of our solar system under such a theory alone. Apart, that is, form the creation of the rest of the universe... This is known as the Big Bang theory, brought about by Charles Darwin, who invented the rest of the theory of evolution.
Refute
This may seem as a nice way to write off any form of creation, for it just all exploded into place. But just looking first at the two particles. According to this theory they floated around in space for billions and billions of years.. Or the void we know as space. Yet if you look at the laws of physics, this cannot be so. For the energy of these two particles would have worn out many eons before they ever met, and therefore would have caused no explosion. yet for a time let us imagine they did, and said explosion did take place...
The nature of an explosion is of such that it never creates life. Never has something exploded into something completely different. And looking even into the blasts of the atomic bombs. Explosions always cause degeneration, never generation, or life. Therefore such an explosion on that magnitude would have destroyed any hope for life on any planet. And with that, the life of the stars. They are composed of many elements and chemicals. Yet only one or two caused the explosion. And even broken down they would not have created enough to form a star, then charge it with so much force as to cause it to light.
With the theory at that of the dust settling, you may note that there is no gravity in space. Only that which is emitted by other objects, and since no other objects were around, the matter itself would have never settled, nor the dust, nor anything for that matter. It would have been given such a thrust that the force of the explosion would send it out into the deep recesses of space, and they would have never slowed down because no gravity existed.
Cycle of the Universe
This title sounds as though it would make a good horror movie, or some sci-fi flick. Yet let's look at it this way. Obviously this would state that the universe has had no beginning, but has kept renewing itself through all the ages of eternity. With what would it renew itself? For the laws of science say that natural systems left to themselves decay and grow old. Yet there had to have been some kind of renewing source, or stars would have burnt themselves out. gases would all have expanded and exploded and grown dim, since time itself would not exist, for everything has always been. And explosion would cause such a force as to destroy the old universe, which would bring in the new on (regarding that the original Big Bang theory were correct). And at that, with what would the universe come to knowledge that it needed to be renewed? Ad who would flip the switch that would renew it?
Even at the beginning that never was under this theory, everything would have been left to itself and would have ran itself out... And under this there would have been nothing of such a force to cause such an explosion to renew...
Earth
Ok let's say that the explosion under either theory was able to work. And hung in space you had the fresh planet earth. Though we could stop here for just a minute and point something out. The sun is gases and therefore burs itself away, as does any star. it has been recorded that the sun loses about five feet every hour. Well judging the distance between the earth and the sun, and factor in time. You would have the sun much larger then it is now, and to the point that the earth would be engulfed in that inferno.. therefore causing a major riff in that theory....
But let's go on and say the sun has always been the same size, and therefore did not scorch the world into nothing.... Then you have to deal with the second major step in the beginning process of evolution about how life was formed. Plant life for that matter. Which is something I cannot answer, for I have never heard an evolutionist speak about how plant life form.. And them saying that it seemingly went un-altered....
The Creatures
Men have seemingly come to an agreement on this matter that, in the dawning days of the world, there was a great pool of slime. Where this slime comes from they will not say. One theory says a particle fell into this slime and a creature came out, another says, that these fishy creatures evolved and then came out as this walking fish creature. Another still says (most widely held) that all life developed from a single-celled organism that evolved. Well for that single-cell organism would be made up of hundreds, in not thousands of proteins. And science has made the estimation that the probability of one protein evolving is. 1 to the 47,000,000 power (something along those lines). Which matched up to that you would have better chances of walking down the street and finding the winning ticket to the Georgia lottery (several hundred million dollars) laying on the curb. And doing the same thing, every time that it came, for the next 10,000 years... Or taking one atom, and releasing it at random into the universe, then going through all space. And grabbing only once, and catching the one atom, BLINDFOLDED... Those are the odds.
Yet this little single-celled creature would stay a single-celled creature, for it would see no need, nor have any blueprint to change into anything else. That is only on the grounds that it evolved a brain, or a sense of logic.
But say they were right and this little creature made I along far enough to come out of the water as some sort of fish-man there would be even more troubles to explain. Why did it come out? How did it reproduce after itself? Why did it change to have legs, if it could have formed something else?
The first creatures would not need any need of sex of reproduce after themselves. Nor would they develop it, for thy would just evolve or grow to suit there needs. Evolution has et to explain this mystery away... Yet this little creature devolved. It would it branch into different kinds of animals? I have not seen polar bears coming to the beaches of Florida.. No, it would be plenty content where it was, and would see no need to go farther out into the world. For it would have no drive to go into the great unknown.
This fish creature, is at best a myth, based on a few logically questions... There are more, but I will stop here..
The Dinosaurs
Let's say creatures made it far enough to the dinosaurs... Well what happened to them. There are several theories. The main one you'll read is that a meteor hint the earth and created a dust storm. Wouldn't we see the effects of said meteor today? They say the crater in Flagstaff, Arizona was probably about the size of a house. A rock the size of a house landing in the ocean is said to have an extreme effect on the world, though one has not. If it was enough to kill all the dinosaurs.. Then where is the marking? And why did only the dinosaurs die?
Now explain this? If the Bible is all false, and there was no flood, then why is the ark on Mt. Ararat? Why are their fish at the tops of the mountains in the Swiss Alps? Why is the fossil record go in this pattern from fossils found the deepest to the nearest to the surface. Sails and slow creatures - Dinosaurs - Horses and such animals - And man is last..... nearest.. As if they were running from a giant mud slide?
In Christ Alone,
Lyle
