Swearing an Oath

[Paul]

lol QFT. It feels good blasting Unno though  

awe but you missed some of my favorites like "snails don't melt", and  "Snakes, while built low, do not eat dirt" how could i have been so blind.

[thrun]

Most skeptics don't like religious debates nd find them flawed because there is no right answer. There are no right answers but there are most certainly wrong ones.

You can't give me that big long hippy love fest diatribe and then tell me there are wrong answers.  Especially when all your answers are a matter of opinion. 

I don't need you to admit you are wrong, the only thing I am trying to beat out of you is whether you truly believe that you have the ONLY answer to the question and how much that answer matters in the end.  And then if you do have the ONLY answer why anyone else should believe that. 

meh, you're going to burn in a lake fire for being a pantheist anyways. 

[Redbear8]

Most skeptics don't like religious debates nd find them flawed because there is no right answer. There are no right answers but there are most certainly wrong ones.

You can't give me that big long hippy love fest diatribe and then tell me there are wrong answers.  Especially when all your answers are a matter of opinion. 

I don't need you to admit you are wrong, the only thing I am trying to beat out of you is whether you truly believe that you have the ONLY answer to the question and how much that answer matters in the end.  And then if you do have the ONLY answer why anyone else should believe that. 

meh, you're going to burn in a lake fire for being a pantheist anyways. 

There's only one way to get into heaven. That's part of the "truth" as everyone keeps calling it. I have found that way, though how I came to it is different than what you will find.

I'll save you a seat next to the lake side.

[ch0wdah]

What should this thread be renamed?

Religious Argumnet on the Internet? (If it offends you feel free to quit reading)

My suggestion.

[Nightstalker]

awe but you missed some of my favorites like "snails don't melt", and  "Snakes, while built low, do not eat dirt" how could i have been so blind.

Yeah those are pretty stupid.

Just rhetoric from fervent atheists that want to drum out and little micro detail on the matter. And a few of them that are alledgedly contradicting, really don't make the case.

Really, it's about the major issues that define the inconsistencies, which are unnerving.

[Unnormal]

Does the law of entropy apply to both open, closed, and isolated systems? 
No, isolated. 

Please sir indulge my misunderstanding once more, and give an example of the laws of entropy being violated in an open system? If in fact it only applies to isolated systems. (or just see question 3)

Are any fields of science not subject to the law of entropy?
Not that I am aware of, but it's implications are most often applied in chemistry and engineering from my understanding. 

Interesting since there are no know exceptions of this law that they would most often apply it to two fields. The truth is it is applied to all fields.

Are there any known violations of the law of entropy?
That's a tricky question, but not that I am aware of. Though as hot systems cool down in accordance with the second law, it is not unusual for them to undergo spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. for structure to spontaneously appear as the temperature drops below a critical threshold.

See next question.

Are the formation of ordered, low-entropy structures at sufficiently low temperatures, able to explain the formation of biological structures?
This seems like a loaded question, if you are trying to bait something out about abiogenesis remember that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with how life arose, only what has happened to it since it did.  So if you could, please elaborate on this question for me. 

Gladly, see your answer to the above question where you said i.e. for structure to spontaneously appear as the temperature drops below a critical threshold. This is in direct reference to that. While these formations are in fact not in violation of the law of entropy they are the very examples your website pointed out as order coming from entropy. In an attempt to account for the possibility of the evolutionary process, despite the law of entropy. When used in that context, it is in fact a reference to the chance of the principals that create "dissipative structures" allowing for the possibility of biological advancement.

What would be required for evolution to start in spite of the law of entropy?
Evolution isn't doing anything in spit of the law of entropy, so this question makes no sense.

The law of increasing entropy is a universal law of decreasing complexity, whereas evolution is supposed to be a universal law of increasing complexity. How can you being intellectually honest with me say that evolution does not indeed violate this law? Even other evolutionist wouldn't agree with you.

"How can the forces of biological development and the forces of physical degeneration be operating at cross purposes? It would take, of course, a far greater mind than mine even to attempt to penetrate this riddle. I can only pose the question - because it seems to me the question most worth asking and working upon with all our intellectual and scientific resources." -Evolutionist Sydney Harris, "Second Law of Thermodynamics." nationally syndicated column in the San Francisco Examiner on January 27, 1984.

We have all evolutionist and creationist alike been asking this question for years. Yet we still have no answers. In fact we have scientist instead of hypothesizing and testing. Are actually perpetuating dead arguments.

If you want to have faith that there is an answer out there despite the evidence, thats fine. I can actually relate very much to that point of view. But, I think it is unfair to continually tell me I just don't understand.

[Unnormal]

Lmao, just let you know so you can cherry pick that info from wikipedia again?

hehe Wikipedia was not my source. Why, because it is not a citable source as anyone can add what they want to it. Using it as a source of information, is almost as asinine as using it as a source for rebuttal.  Oh wait wait wait my mind was just blown and I have to rethink everything I know about the physics of earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

Im sorry but I have to laugh when you point out these people didn't believe in the deity of Christ but listed him among other wise men, or discussed putting to death his followers, who they thought followed the sorcerer Jesus. These are non-biblical, non-Christian references. Or did you miss that part? We will talk about this in more detail, when I have some time off to write this weekend.

Alright, here we go contradictions

Honestly Night I'm disappointed and encouraged at the same time. Have you actually run out of arguments of why you believe the Bible not to be true? Or is your beleif system now based on what you can Google?  I'm not going to bother responding to copy and paste arguments based not on what you know. But, what the internet would tell you. I will be more than happy to discuss any of these "contradictions". If there are any you actually believe to be true contradictions after looking into them. Spamming me with questions to the point that I would have to devote hours to typing is not how you win an argument. That is how you grasp at straws when you got nothing else.

[Nightstalker]

Or is your beleif system now based on what you can Google?  I'm not going to bother responding to copy and paste arguments based not on what you know. But, what the internet would tell you.

HAHAH! ROFL!!   Dude I just 'bout fell out of my chair laughing haha

I knew you couldn't counter the last post I made, but come on, you are going to use your own system of rational against me?

You are now going to criticize me for taking what I can Google on the internet for information, for it's validity, yet you are going to cite contradicting works from people hundreds of years, and thousands of years ago? Did I just read that? seriously? REALLY??!!

My sourcing of the internet, a tool with us here today, cannot compete with a book that has changed hands,  and translations, and quite honestly just changed through many men for centuries?

And this impure internets with it's Google, you have never used that to present cases for argument in this thread, in favor of your stance?

Dude.... c'mon dude. I love you man, but you have to realize how silly you look right now.

Spamming me with questions to the point that I would have to devote hours to typing is not how you win an argument. That is how you grasp at straws when you got nothing else.

lol and you aren't devoting hours to typing now? Those weren't questions I posted, those were facts.


And you sir, have just been dunked on..



I still love you though 

[meowcow]

ROFLMAO!

[thrun]

"How can the forces of biological development and the forces of physical degeneration be operating at cross purposes? It would take, of course, a far greater mind than mine even to attempt to penetrate this riddle. I can only pose the question - because it seems to me the question most worth asking and working upon with all our intellectual and scientific resources." -Evolutionist Sydney Harris, "Second Law of Thermodynamics." nationally syndicated column in the San Francisco Examiner on January 27, 1984.

Quote mining something a god damn news paper writer wrote 25 years ago and trying to pass it off as evidence of anything is pretty much the last straw in me ever discussing anything with you.

If you are going to try to provide evidence or support for a claim about the natural world you need to be looking at current research, and articles written by people in the actual fields that study what the hell you are looking in to.  Not what a fucking syndicated columnist said while you were still shitting your pants and sucking on titties.

Here's a pretty good debate between P.Z Meyers, and a Creationist where PZ spends the first 5 minutes explaining why no ever really wants to talk to them and how to act right.  Then the rest of the debate explaining why the dude who claims to be an expert on whale fossils, but can't name any, is a fucking moron.  

http://www.kkmslive.com/MP3/15013108-Simmons%20&%20Myers.MP3

I'll see you in the other threads with the lulz

[Paul]

alright guys its getting a little heated in here so i am gonna cool it off with some related humor before knightstalker starts pointing out spelling errors and peoples minds blow up because no one knows where life came from.


[yt=425,350]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/etc9aHnCtsk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/etc9aHnCtsk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/yt]

[Nightstalker]

[yt=425,350]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/etc9aHnCtsk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/etc9aHnCtsk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/yt]

lmao.

And no, Im not heated. I dont hold any grudges against unno, come on

[thrun]

Fuck you all Julia Child has all the answers, she's cooking primordial soup.  
[yt=425,350]7pt0rIZ3ZNE[/yt]



Also, the experiment in here clearly defies the laws of thermodynamics as Unno understands them, since all they did was add some fucking energy and they got more complex structures out of it. 

IT'S UNPOSSIBLE!

[Aldoran]

Comedy and Julia Child? Friendly discussions? I hereby declare that this thread has been Hijacked, getting back to the topic originally intended...

There is no god. Discuss.

[Nightstalker]

There is no god. Discuss.

Incorrect.

Discuss.