From PLos Blogs: Expelled’s Creationism is Bankrupt but Persistent (and Politically Connected) By John Rennie Consider it proof that the opponents of evolutionary science are not just intellectually bankrupt. Imagine my delight upon learning this news from the National Center for Science Education: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed — the 2008 creationist propaganda movie fronted by Ben Stein — is scheduled to be auctioned, lock, stock, and barrel, pursuant to the bankruptcy proceeding of Premise Media Holdings LP...... http://blogs.plos.org/retort/2011/0...upt-but-persistent-and-politically-connected/
I liked the idea of buying up the movie and re-releasing it either as a mystery theatre 3000 parody or re-editing it and adding new scenes to expose the lies and selective quoting as an interesting aside, Ben Stein is so proud of his work that he has somehow forgotten to include it in his filmography on his own personal website: http://www.benstein.com/film.html
Buddhism says no God, no creator, everything exists due to the combination of "elements", Buddhism is the most scientific religion.
The day that creationists can demonstrate even a shred of evidence for a super being, stop moving the goal posts backwards to adjust for the reality that science shows to be true, stop doing back-flips to explain their genocidal dogmas, and actually own up to their ludicrous belief that a "god" came out of nowhere and then created a universe for some unknown purpose. . . . THEN, perhaps, we will finally be rid of morons who believe in thousand year old fairy tales and be free of the general stunting-of-civilization that religion has overwhelmingly caused. ~String
When we set out to explain why and how something happens, we must use the evidence, facts and experience available to us if we are to arrive at a logical conclusion. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that the universe had a beginning and that before that beginning there was no universe and therefore there was nothing. We know this because of the Law of Causality (for every cause there is an effect and for every effect there is a cause). Based on this law, we can use the following logic: 1. The universe exists. 2. The universe had a beginning. 3. Before the beginning of the universe, there was no universe. 4. Since there was no universe, there was nothing. 5. Since the universe does exist, it came from nothing. 6. Nothing comes from nothing by any natural cause. 7. Therefore the cause of the universe is supernatural. 8. Life exists. 9. Life always comes from pre-existing life of the same kind (the Law of Biogenesis). 10. Life cannot come from nonliving matter by any natural cause. 11. Since life does exist, the cause of life is supernatural. Many people with a naturalistic worldview assume everything can be explained by natural causes. From the beginning, they reject the possibility of a supernatural cause. Because of this they are left with no scientifically valid answers to the question of how the universe could come from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause of which we are aware. Many answers have been proposed that go beyond the realm of known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation and therefore enter the realm of fiction. The same logic applies to life. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that life only comes from pre-existing life of the same kind. “Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the Law of Biogenesis. Evolution conflicts with this scientific law by claiming that life came from nonliving matter through natural processes” [From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown] Life never comes from non-living matter by any natural cause of which we are aware. Now that we have seen proof that God exists, using logic based on known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we need to see if He has revealed Himself to us. In the Holy Bible there are hundreds of prophecies given by God who is speaking in the first person. In both Bible and secular history we find that those prophecies have been accurately fulfilled. No other writing on earth comes close to doing this! Only God can accurately reveal the future, ergo, He is the author of the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Holy Bible He reveals His nature, our nature, His relationship to us, our need for salvation and His plan of salvation for us. The reason the universe and life cannot come from nothing by any natural cause, but can come from a supernatural cause is because God is the self-existent creator of everything and everyone. He is not subject to His creation. He created it and sustains it. It is a mistake to judge God by human standards and human perspectives. God reveals that He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. If you are interested in more detailed proof, read, “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell. [From “Reincarnation in the Bible?”]
Where to start? 1. The universe exists. You got that one right. We don't know that the universe had a beginning. 2. Evolution does not make any statement as to the origin of life. Only as to speciation once life began.
1. The universe exists. Given 2. The universe had a beginning. 3. Before the beginning of the universe, there was no universe. 4. Since there was no universe, there was nothing. 5. Since the universe does exist, it came from nothing. Lots of this is debatable and not necessarily known yet. We can trace back to the Big Bang due to the remnants of the event, but we have no idea what is beyond that...if it was truly a beginning, or maybe a transition, or something else entirely. We may never know. But replacing a universal birth with a magic being is not an acceptable answer. 6. Nothing comes from nothing by any natural cause. Okay. 7. Therefore the cause of the universe is supernatural. No, that's not a default answer. It's not even a good answer. How does something outside the natural world even influence the natural world without becoming a natural process? 8. Life exists. 9. Life always comes from pre-existing life of the same kind (the Law of Biogenesis). 10. Life cannot come from nonliving matter by any natural cause. Here's where you get it all wrong. We have a lot of good ideas how non-living replication may have become over a long period of time living. Research abiogenesis if you honestly want to learn something. 11. Since life does exist, the cause of life is supernatural. Again, not a default nor a good answer. Magic is never an answer to anything. And presenting Josh McDowell doesn't help your case at all...he's been debunked sufficiently elsewhere numerous times. Oh, and the quote from Walt Brown, it's very true that spontaneous generation doesn't happen. But that's not what abiogenesis is. So that's a nice strawman that's used a lot.
>3. Before the beginning of the universe, there was no universe. That's a pretty big assumption! What do you base this on? >4. Since there was no universe, there was nothing. Another very big assumption. You can make it, but there's no evidence for it. >5. Since the universe does exist, it came from nothing. See above. >6. Nothing comes from nothing by any natural cause. Particles and antiparticles spontaneously appear from nothing all the time. Google "Casimir Effect." >10. Life cannot come from nonliving matter by any natural cause. We've observed self-replicating molecules come into existence in labs. If it can happen in labs in a week or so, it can happen in nature over hundreds of millions of years. >Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has >never been observed. Depends greatly on your definition of life! If your definition includes the ability to replicate, we certainly have. > Evolution conflicts with this scientific law by claiming that life came from >nonliving matter through natural processes Evolution does not claim that.
If it had no beginning, doesn't that leave the only other alternative: it has existed forever? Doesn't science assume life had a beginning?
I have no problems with that. Life on Earth had a beginning, since we know the Earth has not been here forever. But that's not part of evolution.
Possibly, in some state. There's many theories of what was before the Big Bang. It was more of a transition than an abrupt point of time. There was no stage where we can call before non-life and after life. We can't necessarily call many things today living, such as virii, depending on what the definitions are.
Pahu, Bold is mine. So then you create an answer where none exists. We may not be able to answer this with any evidence in our lifetime. Apparently you can't handle that possibility. So you create stories to fill the gaps in knowledge. The sad thing for you is the more we learn, the more meaningless your stories will become. Just look how far the goalposts have been moved in the past few hundred years.
