Someone's Abusing Entropy

[Entropy 5]

Well, I dunno about looking it (although there is something vaguely simian about Ken Ham), but they certainly sound it.

 

Anyway, I've sent Albion over there to needle him a bit.

[Star Crossed 33]

Once you embrace the simple, beautiful truth that only an omnipotent, omniscient being could have created the world in all its glory and diversity, you'll start to believe in Creationism, too. It really is the only credible explanation for our existence.

 

Praise Be!

 

Vote Republican!

[Tempus Fugit 214]

Huzzah for Martin from Skye say I.

 

Keep fighting the good fight sir, let not the unbelievers cause thee to deviate from the true path.

 

Evolution, is after all just a theory and not a fact.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

Evolution, is after all just a theory and not a fact.

CA201

 

regards,

Hein

[Tempus Fugit 214]

Evolution, is after all just a theory and not a fact.

CA201

 

regards,

Hein

Well if your going to use your fiendish scientrickery, then I'll ask one question;

 

The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena"

 

Was it a scientist who came up with that definition I wonder?

 

If so, it's hardly unbiased is it.

[Banshees Scream 110]

The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena"

 

Was it a scientist who came up with that definition I wonder?

 

If so, it's hardly unbiased is it.

 

To me, that definition is spoken crystal clear. Of course it was a scientist who invented it, just as everything is started by something. Sadly, this world has so much yet to define.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

Evolution, is after all just a theory and not a fact.

CA201

Well if your going to use your fiendish scientrickery, then I'll ask one question;

The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena"

Was it a scientist who came up with that definition I wonder?

No, a lexicographer. You might have known if you had taken the effort to read the whole article, including the references:

1. Barnhart, Clarence L., ed. 1948. The American College Dictionary, New York: Random House.

Of course, the article may be lying, I don't have that dictionary at hand.

 

regards,

Hein

[Tempus Fugit 214]

Evolution, is after all just a theory and not a fact.

CA201

Well if your going to use your fiendish scientrickery, then I'll ask one question;

The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena"

Was it a scientist who came up with that definition I wonder?

No, a lexicographer. You might have known if you had taken the effort to read the whole article, including the references:

1. Barnhart, Clarence L., ed. 1948. The American College Dictionary, New York: Random House.

Of course, the article may be lying, I don't have that dictionary at hand.

 

regards,

Hein

An American lexicographer, really what a revolting notion.

 

Rather like giving the keys for the gun cabinet to junior to play with.

 

Evolution will soon be discredited, rather like that other popular scientific theory of the past, eugenics.

[Entropy 5]

Whatever.

[Banshees Scream 110]

Whatever.

 

What a classic reply.

 

Elspeth once wrote this - "One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

 

Your words are probably beyond science at this time. Your wrong as you say 'If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it They don't know how anything started. That would explain reality and all the other unanswered questions. It is a fact that through the years, we have become more safisticated. I guess there is a reason why to believe in god.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

No, a lexicographer.

An American lexicographer, really what a revolting notion.

Nice shuffle, TF. Your evasion has been noted.

Evolution will soon be discredited[...].

Possible, but after 147 years it seems lively enough for me. Don't hold your breath.

 

regards,

Hein

[Entropy 5]

Elspeth once wrote this - "One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

 

I quoted it, I didn't write it myself.

[Madame Defarge 21]

What about those idiots and their stupid theory that (get this!) planets move about

in elliptical orbits? That just can't be. Ellipses are bad, spheres are good, everyone knows that.

 

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06100/680354-115.stm

 

In another thousand years or so evolution may be universally accepted. If there are any

humans left on earth to accept it, that is.

[Entropy 5]

There are some creationists out there who reject atomic theory too. These people just don't like science very much.

[Star Crossed 33]

There are some creationists out there who reject atomic theory too. These people just don't like science very much.

How can there possibly exist anything smaller than that which is visible to the naked eye? Heresy! Burn the witch!

[Boudicca 702]

...

[Anubis the Jackal 77]

I think your time with the Landover Baptists is affecting you, Bou.

[Entropy 5]

Well, better to be affected by Landover Baptist than by Westboro Baptist.

[Anubis the Jackal 77]

F**k me, they're serious! What a bunch of hate-filled cock-suckers.

Well, better to be affected by Landover Baptist than by Westboro Baptist.

[Tempus Fugit 214]

F**k me, they're serious! What a bunch of hate-filled cock-suckers.

Well, better to be affected by Landover Baptist than by Westboro Baptist.

I never realised God had such a downer on cigarettes. Can't remember it being mentioned in the bible.

[Banshees Scream 110]

There are some creationists out there who reject atomic theory too. These people just don't like science very much.

How can there possibly exist anything smaller than that which is visible to the naked eye? Heresy! Burn the witch!

 

You think so simple. As far as i'm concerned it's very possible. And just to be an asshole for one quick second, it's a fact that microscopic sh*t flies in the air and we don't see it.

[TLC 9]

There are some creationists out there who reject atomic theory too. These people just don't like science very much.

How can there possibly exist anything smaller than that which is visible to the naked eye? Heresy! Burn the witch!

 

You think so simple. As far as i'm concerned it's very possible. And just to be an asshole for one quick second, it's a fact that microscopic sh*t flies in the air and we don't see it.

It certainly does. I was strimming the front lawn once and failed to notice someone had deposited a plastic bag full of canine ordure next to the wall.

 

I couldn't see it, but unfortunately could smell it rather too well. I think my neighbours enjoyed the Benny Hill speed strip I performed before I legged it back indoors too.

 

Consider your wrist duly slapped SC, perhaps trial by fire would be suitable punishment? It should help re-balance your humours.

[Banshees Scream 110]

Consider your wrist duly slapped SC, perhaps trial by fire would be suitable punishment? It should help re-balance your humours.

 

... You don't say? He is a warlock! Burn him to the stake!

[Star Crossed 33]

At long last, the Lord our God has, in His infinite wisdom, seen fit to guide our disgusting, unworthy, sinning, mortal hands to build a tribute to his immaculate work... a Creation Museum.

 

Praise be!

 

But lo, hear what the unbelievers have to say about this righteous venture; snake venom and demon jism oozing from every pore of their slimy liberal skins. Darwin? Burn the heretic...

[Banshees Scream 110]

This so called 'Museum' is in so many words a celebration of life itself and what is known to our intelligence. I mean it favors and advertises the legends rather then the actual facts but on reflection and of belief it's not that far out.

 

O and anybody who is seriously offended by this has to be in like f****n first grade. They should recognize what this museum stands for rather then taking it as a big presentation of complete fact.

 

Evolution is one of the most bullshit theories science has ever came to produce and even as Darwin compared significant similarities between man and ape his theory is like fifteen minutes of a film 'that is three hours long' it's one piece of the puzzle. In my terms evolution is the transformation of one species to another, rather then saying the development from a seed to a human being is evolution for example.

 

It's like asking somebody the question 'How did any existence come to reality' and they say the 'Big Bang' Wai wai wait! What? Rewind please... the whole question of all existence is how did it start? Where did it start? - The Big Bang is in the median of all this. The question remains 'where is the front door?' 'where is the starting line?' 'where is the entrance?' My only answer is it's beyond our knowledge and the truth is miles from our little book of common physics.

 

All scientists are sold on the idea of everything and everything must go by the laws of physics and my argument is somewhere along the lines of evidence will show up disowning our physics and it's concepts. The origination of existence or a better way to put it 'it's explanation' can not be explained by these laws defined by the human mind. I understand scientists can only prove fact by using the code of physics but the only question I have that remains is 'when the show down of reality and physics stair face to face who will get the approval? Will the laws of physics expand to the reality of the actual universe or will 'the modern logic compromise? The question remains.