Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 9, 2026, 12:50 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)
#60
RE: Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)
(December 7, 2010 at 9:37 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: 1. Complex specified information always requires an intelligent message sender.
2. All living organisms have complex specified information (DNA).
3. Therefore the complex specified information in living organisms requires an intelligent message sender (God).

1. Everything with a beginning has a cause (law of cause and effect)
2. The Universe has a beginning (scientifically established)
3. The Universe has a cause (God) (Proofs from J. Sarfati, “Refuting Evolution”)

1. False. Bacteria "send" information between each other and are devoid of intelligence.
2. Weak. While all known Earth organism use DNA, the possibility of stabilized RNA sequences in the early evolution of life is quite real (RNA World Hypothesis). In addition, your statement presupposes that all life uses DNA, an absolute statement that is not proven correct since we have not seen all life.
3. False. Previous generations could have passed on an increasingly complex sequence derived from basic environmental interactions and natural selection. Ergo, complexity can arise out of simplicity. (A bit like physics.)

1. True.
2. False. The prevailing theory is that the universe we know of was at one point what we now call the Big Bang. While one may call it the "beginning" of the Universe, there is no way to verify such currently or in the foreseeable future.
3. Only if you define "God" as the cause of the Big bang. Yet that reeks of "God of the gaps" as one certainly can see that you make an argument from ignorance - that because we do not know what preceded the Big Bang, it must be X.

Pathetic.

Why don't you man up and simply accept that we don't know a great many things - it'd serve you better than shrieking "GOD!!11!" at everything.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd) - by Autumnlicious - December 8, 2010 at 3:34 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Young more likely to pray than over-55s - survey zebo-the-fat 16 4412 September 28, 2021 at 5:44 am
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  Creationism Paraselene 203 42405 August 23, 2020 at 2:25 am
Last Post: GrandizerII
  A theory about Creationism leaders Lucanus 24 11157 October 17, 2017 at 8:51 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Prediction of an Alien Invasion of Earth hopey 21 7718 July 1, 2017 at 3:36 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  Science Vs. The Forces of Creationism ScienceAf 15 6050 August 30, 2016 at 12:04 am
Last Post: Arkilogue
  Debunking the Flat Earth Society. bussta33 24 8380 February 9, 2016 at 3:38 am
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  Earth Glare_ 174 46404 March 25, 2015 at 10:53 pm
Last Post: Spooky
  Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically JonDarbyXIII 42 17917 January 14, 2015 at 4:07 am
Last Post: Jacob(smooth)
  creationism belief makes you a sicko.. profanity alert for you sensitive girly men heathendegenerate 4 2907 May 7, 2014 at 12:00 am
Last Post: heathendegenerate
  Religion 'Cause Of Evil Not Force For Good' More Young People Believe downbeatplumb 3 3073 June 25, 2013 at 1:43 pm
Last Post: Jackie



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)