RE: Scientific Debate: Why I assert that Darwin's theory of evolution is false
November 3, 2014 at 8:32 pm
(November 3, 2014 at 7:55 pm)Heywood Wrote: The results of the experiments require conserved laws of nature.No. The conserved laws are based on the results of experiments. The laws are descriptive not presciptive.
Quote: Laws of nature are about something other than themselves. The law of conservation of momentum conserves momentum....it does not conserve itself.We agree. I fail to see how this is important.
Quote:What is required is something which conserves laws of nature and also conserves itself.How about nothing. Your demand that something needs to be there is an assertion. You haven't shown that we need a something.
Quote:Conserving laws of nature and also conserving itself is a quality of God.First, you haven't shown that god has that quality. Two, you have explained nothing. You replaced one mystery with a bigger mystery.
Quote: Does that prove God's existence? It does not.I agree.
Quote: I does prove that something with some of God's attributes must exist in order for the experiments to behave the way they do.No it doesn't.
Quote:Considering the possibility of God here is not pointless because it adds a necessary requirement for the experiments to behave the way they do.Haven't shown that. Your argument is based on something must exist to conserve the conservation laws. You haven't shown this to be the case, but just accerted it.
