[geocentrism] Re: The Big Bang
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:18:50 +1000
Rob said to Jack: By your own argument, all lab experiments that show
how any thing could arise naturally, in fact prove a creator. Rubbish.
Whilst I concurred with most of what Rob said in his post, I really think
that he has missed what Jack was saying, or trying to say.
The classical argument of metaphysics postulated for a logical conclusion
that an intelligent being is necessary for the existence of complex order in
nature, is the demonstration that a human intelligence is necessary to
create a watch. That it cannot evolve in itself by any natural evolution.
This was what Jack was attempting to say, not that every action was due to
Divine interference.
However I do not, and never have, accepted this argument. In a way the
manufacture of a watch is unnatural order, quite distinct from natural
order. Rob went to the basics of natural order, viz The circumference of a
circle is pie D .....It cannot be anything else. If order can flow from a
basic requirement of nature in a simple thing, then there is no reason to
assume that it cannot likewise evolve through a series of progressions to
something that is more complex such as a crystal, and then so on.
My original argument to Aristotle against the comparison of the watch
creator to a God, is the same today as it was as a 14 year old boy.
Nature is not so perfect as the watch. There is so much disorder, even
though natural. The human hermaphrodite comes to mind.
This did not stop me from finding the truth of God though, by much sounder
arguments of revelation, observation and logical reasoning.
The Bible is just a book, no different from the Quirran unless it can prove
itself, which it has done, prophetically, historically and physically.
(personal revelations supernatural miracles etc.)
It is a matter of faith, not science. People will by their nature choose to
follow or reject their spiritual side. And yet, just look at how confused
and divided the followers are. Perhaps God was wise and all knowing indeed
when He had Abraham take his concubine Agar to produce Ismael, who is our
Islamic tormentor today????
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glover, Rob" <Rob.Glover@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 10:23 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The Big Bang
Jack Lewis Wrote:
"But the Earth is not a closed system!"
I just said that.
" Evolutionists get round this fact by
declaring that the required energy comes from the Sun. Can you explain just
how this undirected energy is responsible for increase in order? Your
example of a tomato is circular reasoning."
Oh please. Are you now arguing that God himself intervenes to create every
single tomato plant, bacterium, and virus, every time? Irrespective of the
need for sunlight and nutrients in the ground? Try putting a tomato seed in
a dark room in a dry bed of sand and asking God to make a plant out of it.
If you really want to be spoon-fed the answer, sunlight works on chlorophyll
to give the plant energy. The plant draws moisture and nutrients from the
ground via transpiration. The DNA in the plant cell nuclei uses this energy
and raw material to make new plant material. If God's around, he has nothing
he need do but watch.
Jack Lewis Wrote:
"Are you seriously suggesting that the 'order' shown in the above collection
[Snowflakes, sand dunes, tornadoes, stalactites, graded river beds, and
> lightning] is the same 'order' that is exhibited by life? This level of
order is
extremely complex and full of information. Hardly the same as lightning and
snowflakes!"
No I am not. Where did I suggest that? Life is obviously more complex than
those things. But my POINT is that those things are themselves more ordered,
locally, than the background they arise from. They themselves do not
contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamics as they draw their energy and raw
material from the wider system in which they are embedded.
Jack Lewis Wrote:
> Argument from Personal Incredulity is a risky one to make,
Well isn't this your position vis-a-vis an intelligent creator?
You mentioned experiments that demonstrated matter can be created from
energy. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't it take a great deal of
intelligence, materials, and a whopping great big machine to achieve this?
Unless you can witness this transformation happening naturally (rather than
assuming it happened), it requires a great deal of intelligence."
What an absurd argument. The point of doing the experiments is to recreate
the conditions which occurred naturally out there in the Universe at the
beginning, but cannot occur naturally on Earth in front of our cameras and
notebooks. By your own argument there, God must make the Sun shine, because
alhough we can create nuclear fusion ourselves in a laboratory, it requires
a lot of effort, cost, intelligence and a whopping big machine called JET or
TFTR. Naturally, it requires gravity, space, time, and a billion trillion
tons of hydrogen gas. By your own argument, all lab experiments that show
how any thing could arise naturally, in fact prove a creator. Rubbish.
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any
attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
Other related posts:
