[leps-talk] Ron Proves Creationism wrong

[Xi Wang]

Well, this is kinda getting out of hand.  We're here to talk about leps, let's
leave the rest of it for some other list.  But I will say the following:

I personally think it's rather pointless to be discussing any of this at all.
Not that one shouldn't ponder on such things, but ultimately, it's not possible
to prove god's (not the one that's described in the bible, but the term we apply
to the entity which is responsible behind the universe's design, if any)
existence either way.  And whatever philosophical evidence one has that they
think proves it either way, well, there is a difference between evidence and
perception.  Two different people might see the same evidence to prove
completely opposite things, that's why it's considered _philosophical_.  What is
truth, but what your mind perceives, and who is to say whether your perception
is right or wrong.  As for creationism as exactly described in the bible,
well......  The evidence against this is slightly more concrete I'm afraid.
Radioactive dating (many elements, not just carbon), the age of the universe
based on the speed of light (a number which can be _proven_ mathematically to be
a constant, in fact, it was calculated by Max Planck before it was ever
measured), genomic analyses..etc all say we were here long before 6000yrs ago.

More comments below regarding some leaps in logic:

> How silly it is for anyone to attempt to argue scientifically in favor of a
> Godless universe.  We know absolutely nothing that can explain how such an
> incredible event could possibly occur by accident

And so by default, you explain this with God?

> (except, of course, that
> the event is so highly improbable that our math doesn't even have a way to
> quantify it).

How do you know that there weren't 10^10000 of failed attempts before us, and we
are the sole system in which life occured?  Incredibly rare events can still
happen.  When someone wins the lottery, they do not cry foul.

> We can speak of variation and mutation, but none of this
> begins to explain how matter or energy could come to exist in the first
> place.  Our theories are mere tinker-toys when it comes to explaining the
> origin of life and the universe.

And in what way does God provide a more satisfying answer?  Essentially, instead
of saying, we don't know why there is energy, you're saying, God put it there.
Not a big improvement in my opinion.

>
> I've found that people who attempt to provide scientific "evidence" of a
> Godless universe have come to NEED to have an explanation that disproves
> God,

Yes, because people have an innate desire for the truth, and a logical
explanation of what they see around them.  It is because the convenient idea of
creationism has so many inconsistencies with what is observed in the real world
that it is being constantly challenged.  If it were the perfect and correct
explanation in the world, why would a moderate proportion of an educated
population say otherwise?

>
> It is not silly (or unscientific) to ponder the question of how our universe
> came to be.  Wondering about (and questioning the possible existence of) God
> is, in fact, at the heart of science, and anyone who would shy away from
> such metaphysical questions should be the one accused of not being
> scientific - not the other way around.
>
> Personally, I see overwhelming evidence of Creation wherever I go - in the
> mountains, in the waterfalls, in the plants and animals - but especially in
> the hearts and faces of human children.  God is real and very much alive in
> the world that I live in.

A single person's perceptions doesn't constitute proof of any kind.  There are
people out there who perceive that the earth is flat, and that santa claus
exists.  Perception versus evidence.

>
> I have a Bachelors of Science in Electronic Engineering, including a minor
> in Physics, a Masters of Science in Computer Engineering, and a hard earned
> PhD in living life - and I've found nothing in all the wisdom of man that
> can counter or disprove the existence of God.  Of course, I have the benefit
> of having received the gift of the knowledge of God - something that He
> readily offers every living human being, incidentally - so I suppose I

How can anyone make that statement logically?  I ask you, is this knowlegde
given to people who are mentally retarded and are incapable of learning?


> shouldn't expect anyone to take my word for anything.  Such discernment and
> understanding comes only from the Spirit of God, though clues for its
> discovery have been scattered about the world and throughout the heavens so
> that all might possess it - bushman and businessman alike.
>

Discernment of any kind comes from logical thinking.  And when bushmen claim
that falling stars are not cometary debris, but a message from the gods?

Cheers,
Xi Wang




 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl