Terrible news for the Creation Science museum (and Republicans)

[Darth Omar]

We do not yet understand biological emergence, dark energy, the quantum wave function collapse, and we cannot reconcile general relativity with quantum theory.

And yet I am not aware of one legitimate scientist who has thrown their hands up in defeat and pronounced it is too hard to figure out and it must have been a result of divine intervention.

The odds are we will use our faculties of reason to ultimately find physical and chemical principles that have good explanatory power.

The realm of the inexplicable shrinks decade after decade.


From the metaphysical angle, the better question is: where did the laws of physics and chemistry come from? Why is their order rather than chaos underlying them? Why is there something rather than nothing?

If you want to go searching for providential creation, that is where I suggest starting.

What I meant was the less you know about the inner workings and integrated complexity found even in the most ‘primitive’ cells, the more one realizes what, exactly, is being asked of an abiogenesis *theory*.

And I’m afraid you have it backwards: in Darwin’s day it was a simple matter of natural selection acting on blobs of protoplasm. With the advent of election microscopy and the bio molecular sciences it’s become apparent that those little ‘blobs’ have operational codes that we can only describe as a kind of software along with some pretty nifty nano machinery.

It’s become decidedly more difficult to conceive—not less. I’m not saying give up, my point is they have a pretty steep mountain to climb. And minds shouldn’t be closed to the prospect that it’s impossible to climb.

I don’t know about anyone else, but mine is still wide open. Let the chips fall where they may.

[Into the Night]

Nicolaus Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Galileo Galilei and Johannes Kepler.

None of what they did is 'planetary science'.

Copernicus pushed the theory of the solar centric. He was wrong. The Sun is not the center of the universe, but just another star.
Tycho Brae built some marvelous instruments for watching the sky, including planets, stars, moons, etc. His data was instrumental for Kepler's work.

Galileo observed moons around Jupiter, and thus falsified the theory of the terracentric universe. Not planetary science.

Kepler used the orbit of mars to build general theories of orbits of anything. No planetary science.

Try again.

[Into the Night]

It means take the Bible as it says. No interpretation.

....and....?

[Micawber]

Dumb fuck fallacy

[AProudLefty]

....and....?

You asked the question. I answered.

[Into the Night]

I have been paying attention.

You claimed that "Theory of Natural Selection" has paradoxes. You never ever explained what those paradoxes are.

RQAA. I already did. I will do it again since you apparently missed it the last time.

For Natural Selection to take place, you must have a variety to select from. Natural selection, however tends to reducing variety. So where does the variety come from? You can't suspend natural selection for even a moment.

[Into the Night]

You asked the question. I answered.

Incomplete answer.

[AProudLefty]

None of what they did is 'planetary science'.

Copernicus pushed the theory of the solar centric. He was wrong. The Sun is not the center of the universe, but just another star.
Tycho Brae built some marvelous instruments for watching the sky, including planets, stars, moons, etc. His data was instrumental for Kepler's work.

Galileo observed moons around Jupiter, and thus falsified the theory of the terracentric universe. Not planetary science.

Kepler used the orbit of mars to build general theories of orbits of anything. No planetary science.

Try again.

Let me guess, there is no such thing as orbital mechanics?

[Into the Night]

Let me guess, there is no such thing as orbital mechanics?

For everything, not just planets.

[AProudLefty]

Natural selection, however tends to reducing variety.

Explain.

[Into the Night]

I never said life originated.

So you deny the Theory of Abiogenesis?

[AProudLefty]

For everything, not just planets.

So there's nothing?

[AProudLefty]

Let me guess... there is no such thing as computer science?

[Micawber]

Let me guess, there is no such thing as orbital mechanics?

"Einstein will look wrong in the future despite being more right than his predecessors, therefore he did not do physics or math."

dumbfucking loser fallacy

[Into the Night]

Explain.

Do I need to define 'selection' to you???