Re: More for Mihos, was Re: Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
- From: Frank J <fnci@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:53:41 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 27, 6:48 pm, rich hammett <bubbaric...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm just sending this over to rsfc for our resident astrophysicist,
since it's been at LEAST a day or so since an astronomy question
was pointed at him.
Mihos, it looks like the wingnuts get their information from a
reliable source for science. And I thought Ann Coulter was
the only science expert they had...
Coulter in fact admitted (on DI fellow Michael "Bigfoot" Medved's
radio show in 2006) that she was an "idiot" about science. Then
proceded to defend her misrepresentations of real science in her book
"Godless." You know, the one in which the chapters on "Darwinism" were
essentially written for her by the DI.
Chutzpah knows no bounds.
rich
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Jason Spaceman:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it because they are contrary to scientific laws, contrary to how
we observe nature operating? If we don't see it operating a certain
way, scientists say, "It couldn't have happened that way." Yet --
yet, ladies and gentlemen -- our very existence cannot be explained by
science. The Big Bang violates the best-known law of science, the
first law of thermodynamics. The first law of thermodynamics says
that you cannot create something out of nothing. Hello, Mr. Pascal.
He wasn't even a scientist. He was a philosopher. It's easier to
believe that something that has been can be again than it is to
believe that something that has never been can be. Yet, the Big Bang
violates the first law of thermodynamics. That law says you cannot
create something out of nothing. But cosmologists, who are physicists
that study the evolution of the universe, have to invent new physics
to explain the Big Bang: physics that have never been observed. So is
this science or is it faith? The Big Bang crowd, nobody was there to
see it. We're just told that this tiny little speck of almost nothing
exploded one day and became the universe?
What law of physics explains that? We don't have one. They've had to
create it because they haven't observed it. The Big Bang is as much
an article of faith as anything else is in any other religion. It's
just like the other day. We found out nobody in the world of science
or medicine has yet to prove that unsaturated fats, saturated fats,
whatever, clog your arteries and make you sick. Nobody has ever
proved it. Yet we all believe it, and a lot of people run around
believing the Big Bang. Nobody can prove it, and the laws of physics
as we know them cannot explain it, and yet we accept it. So what's the
problem with Dr. Rowan Williams? You can claim that the universe has
always existed, if you want, on the other hand, but if you do that --
if you say that the universe has always existed -- now you're
violating the next most important law in science, which is the second
law of thermodynamics, which says that everything is running down and
wearing out, but the universe is still wound up and operating, isn't
it? But we're told it's still expanding. Stephen Hawking, A Brief
History of Time? I was able to get through 80% of it before I gave up.
The universe is still expanding. Then it's going to contract. The Big
Bang is going to become the Big Implosion.
We're going to all die! Well, we won't be around when this happens
because we're talking gazillions of years. But wild guess. So it's
wearing down. It's the second law of thermodynamics. "Oh, yeah. It's
wearing down. We're going backwards here. The universe is still wound
up and operating." Therefore, here's the bottom line: Whether he
knows it or not (and this is the key point here for the Archbishop of
Canterbury), his very existence is a miracle, as is all of ours a
miracle. That is, it cannot be explained by modern science. By the
way, the Archbishop of Canterbury also said the nativity scene is a
"legend." Not real, just a legend. So for those of you out there who
feel compelled to take some of your Christian beliefs, discard the
miracles, and replace them with modern science and thereby invent a
new religion, go right ahead -- and if this is what Dr. Rowan Williams
wants to do, if he wants to throw out the things in Christianity that
he just can't explain in his "superior mind," go ahead, Dr. Williams.
But just don't call it Christianity. You are distorting and debasing
it. Call it whatever you want. Call it Williamsism. I don't care
what you call it, but do not call it Christianity. When you start
cherry-picking things that you want, cherry-picking things that your
superior mind says you can't possibly accept because stars don't stop;
there's no virgin both, and nobody can rise from the dead, fine. Go
base your own religion on that; find the flock that you want, but
don't call it Christianity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_122007/content/01125110.g...
J. Spaceman
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ Barry Goldwater: "Every good Christian should line up
\ and kick Jerry Falwell's ass."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
- References:
- Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
- From: Jason Spaceman
- Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
- Prev by Date: Re: The Reasonable Minority
- Next by Date: Re: The Reasonable Minority
- Previous by thread: Re: More for Mihos, was Re: Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
- Next by thread: Re: More for Mihos, was Re: Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
