LewisWildermuth said:
The Law of Entropy apply to closed systems only, since the Earth recieves energy from the sun and other sources it is not a closed system, there not too hard to understand is it?
The universe is a closed system.
My car recieves energy from the sun. It fades the paint and destroys the rubber seals around my windows. My skin receives energy from the sun and causes cellular mutations the can eventually become cancerous - NOT HELPING THE SYSTEM.
Adding energy to something does not counter entropy EXCEPT where that energy can be channled, or utilized. A beautiful example of this is photosynthesis. But this is the only natural exception I'm aware of.
Adding energy is otherwise destructive. Look at all the energy we added to Hiroshima - none of that energy helped create a higher level of order.
Sorry man.
And so the Bible does not disagree with the scientific understanding of entropy. How is this evidence against science?
Entropy IS science!! It argues about the notional conjecture of EVOLUTION. Entropy makes evoltution hard to validate.
Ummm... Would you care to prove this? I have not seen this in any scientific litrature, are you just saying something you heard someone else say without researching it?
I'll prove it as soon as you prove all of the stuff YOU HEARD SOMEONE SAY WITHOUT RESEARCHING IT.
So you will give up Christianity when it is found? and you forgot the Kepler belt, which is known and whe have overwhelming evedence of.
No. The Oort cloud cannot be seen at the range it is claimed to exist at. Good science will explain why:
Scientists cannot measure more than a 100 light years accurately. Some say anything over 20 light years becomes near impossible to accurately measure; at any rate we can discount the "billions of light years" silliness.
Trigonometric calculations explain why:
1. Take two observation points and an imaginary triangle to a third point to determine the distance to the third point. I've used this in land-based navigation.
2. The greatest distance we can use is the points of earth's orbit in December and June, basically 186,000,000 miles (16 light minutes).
3. At ONE light year (525,948 light minutes), the angle would be only 0.017 degrees. At greater than 100 light years, we're talking infintessimal angles, or no valid trigonometric measurements.
I'm not up on the Kepplar belt yet, but I'll get back to you. It may also fit in the "not observed" column.
But Jupiter still obeys the laws of physics, I did not say the processes were the same, but they are both understood. Now if Jupiter did not put out any energy, then science would be in trouble.
Of course Jupiter follows the laws of physics - no where did I argue contrary. It has been said that it loses heat twice as fast as it gains it from the sun. Billions of years does not fit here at all.
But we are not talking about steller stuff here, we are talking about a little moon that we can observe and have observes being compressed and streached.
Okay, I must ask how we observe it being stretched and compressed, and how that discredits any claims that Ganymede's magnetic field is curiously strong, lending questions as to its young age.
Okay, while it is true that one could say that God did it to just about anything, then one has to explain why God did it in such a way as to make us think it was old... In other words, why would God lie through his creation?
Christ delights in the fact that the complex nature of God is so misunderstood by them that profess great intellect, and so easily grasped by the simple.
Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus said,
"I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants.
God doesn't lie - MAN IS THE LIAR. How could God lie about, or through His creation and man's interpretation of it be so infallible? Man has it backwards, but God gives him enough rope to hang himself if he so chooses to contst God. That is the point of Rom 1.
Now Lewis, I'm arguing Biblical sense (and some science, but that is not my primary means) against speculations that God did not construct the universe by means of "endless change over billions of years". He spoke the universe into existence ex nihilio, and created the world in SIX LITERAL DAYS.
My faith is not challenged by so-called scientific contradictions. In fact, I'm a stronger YEC because of it (I don't care for the label "YEC" btw, I just take the Bible as it stands and believe the message from cover to cover).
I certainly do not claim that your faith (Lewis) is deranged or stunted by any means, other than to simply point out among christians, in this forum, that we must not quickly ditch the literality of the word because a bunch of scientists chant 'billions of years' and we're supposed to bow down to it as gospel.
The biblical conflicts haven't changed - just the names.
