Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Join ASA or sign up
Sign In


Forgot your password?

Haven't registered yet?

Calendar

9/3/2014 » 9/7/2014
Wonders of Science, Marshalltown, IA

9/5/2014 » 9/6/2014
“Truth for a New Generation,” Spartanburg, SC

9/19/2014
Human Sexuality Conference, Bartlesville, OK

9/19/2014
“Darwin, Dawkins and the Divine: Why is biology at the heart of the New Atheism?,” Cambridge, UK

9/21/2014
“Science & Faith: Are They Really in Conflict?,” simulcast multiple locations

Featured Members

American Journal of Physics
Moderator(s):
Thread Score:
|<
<<
<
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9
Thread Actions

6/15/2012 at 3:03:24 PM GMT
Posts: 130
I'm sorry. I thought you understood at least atoms and gases in a thermodynamic sense but I was mistaken. I think at this point I will advise you to continue your discussion with a different group.


6/16/2012 at 6:26:43 PM GMT
Posts: 60
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaF8vX6HXQ.

I just sent the following email to an ASA member asking me about my religion and views on evolution:

I am a Catholic and think that creationism and intelligent design are irrational. Darwinism, the idea that humans evolved from animals, is pseudoscience because only the bodies of humans evolved from animals, not their souls. Intelligent atheists think the human soul is just an idea, but rational people know that the human soul is spiritual. Less intelligent atheists think the human soul is spiritual by definition. 

An example of pseudoscience promoted by atheists and Protestants is that natural selection explains common descent. Natural selection only explains how giraffes got long necks, not how giraffes evolved from bacteria in 3.5 billion years.

I'v been trying to explain this to Randy Isaac on the Open Forum by quoting from peer-reviewed articles and scholarly works. Randy's responses are very weak, to say the least. No member of the ASA is supporting me in my efforts to get the AJP to retract its absurd article titled "Entropy and evolution." You are the first ASA member that seems to be a real Christian, not a liberal Christian. Real Christians believe in Heaven and Hell. 

I just started reading Biology's First Law: The Tendency for Diversity and Complexity to Increase in Evolutionary Systems whose co-author Daniel W. McShae is an associate professor of biology at Duke University. He is not an advocate of intelligent design. What follows is the opening paragraph of the book. I was happy to find it because it gives me another quote to throw into the face of people who believe in evolution instead of believing in the Bible.  

The history of life presents three great sources of wonder. One is adapttion, the marvelous fit between organism and environment. The other two are diversity and complexity, the humge variety of living forms today and the enormous complexity oftheir internal structure. Natural selection explains adaptation. But what explains diversity and complexity? 

My YouTube video titled, "The Truth About Evolution and Religion" contains a number of similar quotes.  



David Roemer


6/26/2012 at 10:37:47 AM GMT
Posts: 60
I just posted my review of  Biology’s First Law: The Tendency for Diversity and Complexity to Increase in Evolutionary Systems on Amazon.com by Daniel W. McShae and Robert N. Brandon. This is a link to it

http://newevangelist.me/2012/06/25/1800/

I’v already quoted from this book to support my campaign to get the AJP to retract its absurd article about entropy and evolution. This is another quote: 

Based on what we have said so far, some will be poised and ready to make a leap, from the notion of accumulation of accidents to the second law of thermodynamics…. We advise readers against this, for their own safety. We are concerned that on the other side of that leap there may be no firm footing. Indeed, there may be an abyss. First, we think the foundation of the ZFEL [zero-force evolutionary law] lies in probability theory, not in the second law or any other law of physics. And second, our notions of diversity and complexity differ fundamentally from entropy, in that entropy, unlike diversity and complexity is not a level-related concept.  (location 220 on Kindle) 



David Roemer


Last edited Tuesday, June 26, 2012