Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Joe G @ Mar. 06 2012,12:32)|
|Also see Hawking who has said this is all just an accident- that the laws "just are (the way they are)"|
That's it right there Joe.
There is no blind watchmaker. THERE ARE LAWS that govern how subatomic particles interact, how atoms interact and change, how molecules interact and change.
And there is not a single one of those laws that has ever been shown to prevent life developing from non-life.
Your inability to use the equation that describes the 2nd Law is noted.
Wait, before you go off 1/2 cocked (or quarter... eighth cocked in your case?) let me just remind you that many of the laws that govern these things have only recently been discovered. My understanding is that there are some excellent hypotheses (you know, testable, falsifiable, repeatable... unlike stuff IDiots do) that may even help us to determine why those laws are the way they are... the laws to make universal laws if you will.
Now, I understand that you refuse to accept this. Because one person on the internet can't describe the entire creation of the known universe from scratch, then you think you've won the argument. That just goes to show how you really don't understand science.
Design is not the null hypothesis. Design is not what you should go to when you don't know the real answer. There are so many logical fallacies with that tactic I don't even want to count them... but you use that rule.
So, again, stand up for YOUR notions Joe. Use the equation that describes the second law to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that life, in an open system, cannot exist.
Since you can't, I'm going to do some useful work while you fume and rage impotently at your keyboard in your mom's basement.
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.