by SYN 17 Replies latest jw friends
Is our Universe millions or billions of years old? No! And little by little, methodological errors and scientific uncertainty are bearing this out.
amazing how someone can come from the above article to this conclusion!?! its like weighing yourself, noticing that you are 10% lighter than you expected and concluding from that that you have no weight at all...amazing reasoning.
The three billion years is significant since it would impact the Evolutionists time frame dramatically. You cannot rationalize this fact away.
ThiChi,
How, exactly, does losing 3 billion years in the age of the universe impact evolution on earth? The age of the universe does not change the age of the earth. The earth is still 4 billion years old.
The title of Harun Yahya's article would make just as much sense if it said: Thermodynamics Falsifies Weather
rem
The Universe is evolving to more and more complexity.
Physists tell us that the farther we go back to the begining the simpler things were.
The four laws of gravity, weak nuclear,strong nuclear, and electromagnetism were at one time just one law. As the Universe got older by just fractions of a second the one law became 2 then 3 and now 4.
The early universe when about 300,000 years old expanded enough to cool down enough which allowed electrons to orbit nuclei which in turn formed atoms(more complex).
The Universe initially when matter first came into exisitence was 75% hydrogen & 25% helium with very rare amont of lithium. These are the most lightest and least complex atoms. As suns and galaxies began to condence(form) the Hydrogen started to fussion forming more complicated Helium and then Helium fuses to form even more complicated atoms, this proccess can continue all the way up to makeing Iron, and can go no further unlees the star has enough mass to go Supernova. When a star goes supernova it then proceeds tomake all the rest of the atoms we now know about and in its explosion sends these newly formed atoms thru out space. These new atoms then form panets and other new stars.
These new atoms form molecules and then bases, then amino acids, in turn more complicted protiens.
The evidence is very clear to anyone with an open mind that the universe is evolving to more and more complexity not devolving.
Has anyone studied the anthropic principle? It seems to me that there has to be some type of Cosmic Blueprint that is responsible for this tremendeous order of matter and laws that make this universe posible, and life in it.
Oh, this article is sooooooo scientific sounding! Didn't it impress you?
It reminded me of the Watchtower's own struggle to sound like it knew what it was talking about when it came to reality! -- And how that used to impress me before I developed my "baloney detector".
All the information stressed in this article makes it clear that evolution is a dogma that is against empirical science and the origin of living beings can only be explained by the intervention of a supernatural power. That supernatural power is the creation of God, who created the entire universe from nothing. Science has proven that evolution is still impossible as far as thermodynamics is concerned and the existence of life has no explanation but creation.
There may be a problem, here though. Isn't there another law of physics which states that you can't create something out of nothing? I mean, if he's right, and we're going to rule out evolution due to its supposedly violating the laws of physics, then turnabout is fair play: we'd have to rule out creation as well.
Sorry, but to put it politely as I can: this article is the biggest bunch of crap I've read since I put down my last Watchtower.
D wiltshire,
absolutely right!
about the anthropic principle: this states that there is no blueprint...we exist because of chance...there is an infinite number of universes and we just happen to be in a complex one that allows intelligent life forms to develop. its a interesting philosophical idea but because of lack of evidence just a possibility.
ThiChi,
it doesn't matter much if the universe is 18, 15 or 12 billion years old.
Wow that was quite an impressive article, lots of big words and everything.
So I guess all the fields of science that depend on evolution being valid will now suffer, or have to make some major changes anyway. Funny, I just chastised my son about a week ago for not finishing the full regiment of antibiotics he was prescribed by his doctor. I explained that if all the antibiotics are not taken, the likelihood of development (evolution) of antibiotic resistant strains of the germs infecting his body would be increased. Hence he could be re-infected, and this time they would come back stronger and it would be harder to treat him.
That is why antibiotics have a label placed on the bottle that says finish the entire bottle unless otherwise instructed by your physician. Now what are all those drug companies supposed to do with these labels? Oh well
Stupid doctors, what do they know anyway? J
Freeman
There is more to science than testtubes and some words that sound like they may be Latin :) However, that does seem to be suficient to fool the majority. How have we come to this ?
