Hugh Ross: Creation as Science

Started by Da Pittman8 pages

WD just posted this and thought that it was also good for this thread.

The Bible "is not a science book," Funes said, adding that he believes the Big Bang theory is the most "reasonable" explanation for the creation of the universe. The theory says the universe began billions of years ago in the explosion of a single, super-dense point that contained all matter.

--Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory

"Claim CF001:
The second law of thermodynamics says that everything tends toward disorder, making evolutionary development impossible.
Source:
Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 38-46.
Response:

1. The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing. It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease. This does not prevent increasing order because

* the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.
* entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. (Aranda-Espinoza et al. 1999; Kestenbaum 1998) Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size (Han and Craighead 2000).
* even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.
In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.

2. The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution (Demetrius 2000).

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994).

3. Creationists themselves admit that increasing order is possible. They introduce fictional exceptions to the law to account for it.

4. Creationists themselves make claims that directly contradict their claims about the second law of thermodynamics, such as hydrological sorting of fossils during the Flood."

Also; "Watch my propaganda, or don't post." How deluded are you?

A critique of Hugh Ross, by Mark Perakh.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/ross.cfm#crusade
Read it or shut the fuck up. Apparently.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
"Claim CF001:
The second law of thermodynamics says that everything tends toward disorder, making evolutionary development impossible.
Source:
Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 38-46.
Response:

1. The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing. It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease. This does not prevent increasing order because

* the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.
* entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. (Aranda-Espinoza et al. 1999; Kestenbaum 1998) Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size (Han and Craighead 2000).
* even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.
In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.

2. The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution (Demetrius 2000).

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994).

3. Creationists themselves admit that increasing order is possible. They introduce fictional exceptions to the law to account for it.

4. Creationists themselves make claims that directly contradict their claims about the second law of thermodynamics, such as hydrological sorting of fossils during the Flood."

Also; "Watch my propaganda, or don't post." How deluded are you?

A critique of Hugh Ross, by Mark Perakh.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/ross.cfm#crusade
Read it or shut the fuck up. Apparently.

The overall style of Ross' presentation of scientific theories, in which he, on the one hand mentions dozens of scientific terms hardly familiar to non-experts, but which, on the other hand is often utterly lacking in clarity, makes one wonder how well he himself understands those theories. It is hard to avoid the feeling that the above equations and terms are presented for the sole reason of impressing the readers with Ross's scientific qualifications and knowledge.

This part reminds me of someone else on this forum. 😉

A fart?

wish X would comment on geocentrism he obviously knows his shit. btw GOOD JOB! stick it to ushomefree. great propoganda vids ushomefree. i seriously doubt you'll convince ANYONE short of a 8th grader of anything. grats on that bro

This thread lacks value to KMC.

Especially the way its being debated.

Originally posted by queeq
Especially the way its being debated.

We can't debate until we see the movie, and no one can get through the movie.

Originally posted by chickenlover98
wish X would comment on geocentrism he obviously knows his shit. btw GOOD JOB! stick it to ushomefree. great propoganda vids ushomefree. i seriously doubt you'll convince ANYONE short of a 8th grader of anything. grats on that bro
I'm not one for physics also while I'm relatively well versed in evo-bio the "Claims and responses" are from the Index of creationist claims from talkorigins; a compilation of cdesign propentsists "greatest hits" thus the quotation marks. The very fact that there's a giant list of claims that I can push CTRL+F and find refutations to indicates that this thread is of zero value.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
We can't debate until we see the movie, and no one can get through the movie.

A mystery wrapped in an enigma.

But this thread has been going on for pages now...

Originally posted by queeq
A mystery wrapped in an enigma.

But this thread has been going on for pages now...

For some reason this post made me hungry. 😆