WidowMakers wrote:I have not forgotten the thread.Neoteny wrote:WidowMakers wrote:I am not saying creation is proved by science, I am saying creation does not contradict science. Regardless of the time that the universe has been around, the laws of thermodynamics, the laws of gravity, the laws of magnetism, biology, fossils, geology, physics, etc, they do not prove creation wrong. Creation can exist within the realm of science. By saying it is not supported by anything is not correct. You may not agree that it is true but it does not contradict any of the above issues.
I want to bump this thread, but at least do it productively. This just caught my eye. Basic physics proves creation wrong. One of those laws that creationists love quoting: energy cannot be created, nor destroyed. Creationism, by definition of course, implies that a creator created our energy. Not possible according to physics. I'm only being slightly facetious.
Moving on, it's still clear to me that you do not grasp the full concept of science. Sure, creationism might be able to exist within the bounds of science (except for what was mentioned above), but so can fairies. And none of us believe in fairies, right?
The goal of science is not to prove anything. It is to disprove alternatives. And we have disproven creation with physics. Yes? Noone has successfully disproven evolution.
Actually the laws of thermodynamics say that matter and energy cannot come into being by themselves. Creation is a supernatural process. Those laws do not apply to supernatural processes since supernatural things cannot be tested or studied with natural laws.
So since these laws are natural laws and evolution is a naturalistic theory (natural made itself), these laws apply and the big bag is in violation of them.
I.E. If there is a creator and he made the universe, matter and energy, he was outside this universe, matter and energy, so the laws that govern this universe, matter and energy do not apply to the creator.
WM
P.S. Neoteny. I should have your response to your post today. I have had a TON of other stuff to do lately.
Actually, it states that energy in a closed system remains constant. It doesn't matter if god exists outside of the universe. If he is creating energy in it, then the law is broken. The big bang theory doesn't postulate the creation of any energy. It asserts that the energy was already there. I suppose that one could assume that the universe isn't a closed system, that there is some connection between god's universe and ours (whatever the hell his universe is), but that is projecting a whole lot of conjecture into the situation. That is something that should not be done. Additionally, a link between our universe and another is something that should be testable, especially if there is energy exchange. There is postulation about black holes and quantum physics leading to other universes, but until there is more decisive evidence, those postulates should be taken with as much critical thought as one of a god. Looking at the evidence presented to us, we cannot postulate the existence of god, even if one could reside in the gaps of our knowledge.