Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Proof against abiogenesis/evolution -- affirmative proof of God
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="True_Blue" data-source="post: 47815893" data-attributes="member: 28138"><p>US38, the 2nd Law is not an equation--it's an idea. An equation can be used to correctly describe a parameter of that idea and to model the practical functioning of the idea, but the equation itself is not the 2nd Law. The 2nd Law is a universal law of decay. We are disagreeing about which items are subject to decay, and what form the decay takes. Moreover, an equation is only useful to the extent that it communicates an idea in an effective manner to the reader. Your equation notation in the context of this thread is a form of obfuscation, not illumination. </p><p></p><p>More basically, I am using the 2nd Law in an attempt to disprove a closely held, personal belief--a religion if you will--that naturalism rather than God explains the origin of life. My argument will only be effective for a person balanced somewhere in the the middle, or someone who already shares my views about God. To a person strongly opposed to the idea of God, I fully recognize that all of my arguments, no matter how well argued, will not be effective.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="True_Blue, post: 47815893, member: 28138"] US38, the 2nd Law is not an equation--it's an idea. An equation can be used to correctly describe a parameter of that idea and to model the practical functioning of the idea, but the equation itself is not the 2nd Law. The 2nd Law is a universal law of decay. We are disagreeing about which items are subject to decay, and what form the decay takes. Moreover, an equation is only useful to the extent that it communicates an idea in an effective manner to the reader. Your equation notation in the context of this thread is a form of obfuscation, not illumination. More basically, I am using the 2nd Law in an attempt to disprove a closely held, personal belief--a religion if you will--that naturalism rather than God explains the origin of life. My argument will only be effective for a person balanced somewhere in the the middle, or someone who already shares my views about God. To a person strongly opposed to the idea of God, I fully recognize that all of my arguments, no matter how well argued, will not be effective. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Proof against abiogenesis/evolution -- affirmative proof of God
Top
Bottom