Replies

Ice-Flyer,

"...You reply to me on the law of thermodynamics because I ASKED about it and call that wielding?..."

Here is your original post I replied to, with the relevant section highlighted:

"Just because something is observable does not mean it is fully explainable. This is the wiggle room the evolutionist needs to keep their “theory” as the only acceptable form of knowledge describing our origin. Yet in all of this I have never heard why there can be laws of physics that had to be violated to make it possible. The 2nd law of thermodynamics had to be violated for the theory of evolution to move from idea to fact. Things had to go from disorder to order for it to have happened. Oh, I do get “explanations”, but they are point of view, not based upon the law they firmly believe in."

Now, as far as I can tell, there is NO QUESTION asked in this post. You flatly stated that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics has to be violated for the theory of evolution to be true.

Later, you chide someone for not having complete knowledge of a subject before posting argumentative statements. I tried to gently remind you that in this case it is the pot calling the kettle black. It does not matter if the other poster is correct or incorrect about the 3/5ths clause. What does matter is that you were eager to condemn their lack of knowledge in a subject, rather than post facts and arguments supporting your position.

In many of these "crevo" threads, I have noticed that people often yell "LEARN ABOUT SUCH AND SUCH..." When I encounter posting with verifiable errors, I almost always try to explain the error using layman's terms. My posts on this thread have addressed errors/weaknesses in arguments regarding the 2nd Law and the "complexity" issue. While my manner of writing might be "colorful", it is not meant to "jump" on anyone.

You jumped the Gun here Rebel_Ace. You are referring to my initial post...you responded to it with your explaination. My SECOND post TO YOU which has the "question" (post 129) referred to is as follows:

I accept your answer, Rebel_Ace. You're saying that we evolved from a combination of events ranging from the sun and its activity to the earth going from superheated surface to cooler surface to molicules coming in from space to then arrive on the planet through our atmosphere after the cooling period, to mix with others to have the suns heat and nutrition combine with that mixing to form yet more complex organisms to then on and on and on to today. Is this what you are saying?

I am not disagreeing that I was eager to correct that easily documented historical fact. You were not gentle at all as I see it, you were to the point. Colorful yes, but so what, I am not so fragile that I break at debate or argument. You "correction" does not diminish my faith a single bit even though it educated me. And my "LEARN ABOUT SUCH AND SUCH" had ZERO to do with "creo" but about the constitution and the 3/5ths clause. There is a vast difference between the two subjects.