The Bible

Now, JIA you are spamming the forum.

Originally posted by StaT1c
Anything that isn't in the same category is pretty much a contradiction in a more complex way of thinking. To add on, they hardly share any similarities at all and contradiction is mostly about sharing similarities and opposing them simultaneously. In a way, you can't really compare science and religion because they are two totally different subjects. It's like saying shoelaces contradict paper.......

If I'm wrong, I want to hear your critique on this...=]

Not necessarily, I have just shown you that just because matter and/or energy cannot be created by natural means that does not mean that it cannot be created supernaturally. This is not a contradiction if you carefully follow the arguments provided in the previous posts.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Not necessarily, I have just shown you that just because matter and/or energy cannot be created by natural means that does not mean that it cannot be created supernaturally. This is not a contradiction if you carefully follow the arguments provided in the previous posts.

There is no such thing as supernatural. If energy can be created, this will show its self in nature, and nature shows that energy cannot be created.

Old thread. 😑

Spamming

JIA is a Spammer.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Old thread. 😑

There is no way that the universe is eternal, just look at the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

1. Evolution proposes that the entropy was reduced in the universe by physical properties in the universe.

False

evolution as an explanation for the origin of reduced entropy in the universe

Edit:

3. Explanations that contradict data are unscientific.

False. They may be erroneous, but that doesn't make them unscientific.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
False

Is a non-issue. You aren't saying anything that people will disagree with (because it is nonsense).

Edit:

False. They may be erroneous, but that doesn't make them unscientific.

But...do you believe that the universe i.e. energy has always existed (i.e. in this material universe)?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
There is no way that the universe is eternal, just look at the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Energy is eternal. Look at the fist Law of Thermodynamics.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
False

Is a non-issue. You aren't saying anything that people will disagree with (because it is nonsense).

Edit:

False. They may be erroneous, but that doesn't make them unscientific.

Shall I rest my case?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Shall I rest my case?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329

You should try a science site sometimes.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But...do you believe that the universe i.e. energy has always existed (i.e. in this material universe)?

Originally posted by AngryManatee

omg, I was literally making that face as I saw that image

possibly a sign of supernatural power

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Shall I rest my case?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329

Almost all the evidence and references that they used are from the late 70's or 80's, you don't think new discoveries have been learned from then? How about you use some creditable reports to back up your claims from a site that doesn't have its own agenda? Science loves to prove itself wrong so if the second law is truly "broken" then it would not be used.

This guy needs to take a lesson from his own book...

"Science is based on observation and reproducibility. But when pressed for the reproducible, empirical data that document their claim of a self-created Universe, scientists and philosophers are at a loss to produce those data. Perhaps this is why Alan Guth lamented: “In the end, I must admit that questions of plausibility are not logically determinable and depend somewhat on intuition” (1988, 11[2]:76)—which is little more than a fancy way of saying, “I certainly wish this were true, but I could not prove it to you if my life depended on it.” To suggest that the Universe created itself is to posit a self-contradictory position."

So let me see you reproduce your data? Hmmmmmm 😉

Some other bits that I liked...

"That two independent variables should match to such unimaginably high precision seems unlikely"
Unlikely but not impossible, it is also unlikely that I will win the lottery twice in a row but it can happen.

"it appears to have been designed"
"there is no avoiding the conclusion that the world looks as if it has been tailored for life"
"All reality appears to be a vast, coherent"
"the entire grand scheme of eternal inflation does not appear to be open to observational tests"
"In my personal opinion, the new inflationary model is now dead as a scientific theory"
A whole lot of opinions, appears and seems so where is your data?

"There is no evidence, so far, that the entire universe, observable and unobservable, emerged from a state of absolute Nothingness" Isn't that what God supposed to have done? 😖

"I must admit that there are yet no empirical or observational tests that can be used to test the idea of an accidental origin"
Only good statement in there

does science contradict the bible? YES

To bad JIA will never respond to me, guess you just have to trump him to be on his ignore list 😆

I'm still waiting for him to give me my reply; I posted before you.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Well given energy cannot be created or destroyed that pretty much has to be the case.

What do you mean by well given energy?