So I'm tired, a little sick, have a half hour to kill, so what should I talk about today? Ooh I know, let me take a crack at another one of those silly creationist articles that Mogley52 so kindly spammed my creationism video with. This one is called THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION! Ooh, should be good, and why not? It has an oxymoron right there in the title. Turns out, I have found the source from which this particularly annoying creationist has copy and pasted his spamming comments from.
The first paragraph is enough to make a buzzer go off in my head every half a sentence. Mogley, you don't get to redefine the second law of thermodynamics to include "even in an open system". When you make a statement like that you have to show some reasoned scientific evidence to support what is now only your crackpot idea. No Mogley, Stephen Hawking is not an "evolutionary scientist". And why does God not need a beginning exactly, if you claim that everything, even time, must have one? Ugh we're going to have a seperate post about cosmology aren't we? Fine, but let's move on, I'm still waiting for some actual science that supports creation, just as soon as I wake up after knocking myself out from that facepalm.
OK I'm back. The next two paragraphs blather on about thermodynamics (which this guy has taken the liberty of redefining without giving any explanation as to how he got to these conclusions) and how Einstein believed in an Intelligent Creator (which is a hideous argument from authority which we have already established is complete bullshit regardless) so let's get to the good stuff in paragraph 4:
BIG BANG FLAWS: Big Bang scientists extrapolate a hypothetical scenario from a few facts. Yes, some galaxies are expanding, moving further away, but this is not the case with the entire universe. There are galaxies in the universe running perpendicular to the rest of the galaxies. That's contrary to Big Bang. If Big Bang really occurred, there should be a uniform distribution of gasses.
WHAT?! Now I'm no physicist, by any stretch of the imagination, but I can see from a mile that this is total bullshit. Why the hell do we have to have uniform distribution of gases (and yes, I do know how to spell gases)?! Have you ever heard of, I dunno, gravity? The whole bit about how stars are born? Do me a favor, look it up, there is absolutely nothing incompatable between the big bang and the existence of gravity (trust me, they've notcied gravity exists already).
But from here we jump straight into evolution, so let's have at it!
Only evolution within biological "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across biological "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems, etc. were still evolving?
You do realize that the idea that biological life is divided into "kinds" is one invented by creationists right? Notice how he stays away from the word "species", as speciation has also been demonstrated numerous times in the lab as well as observed in nature.
Creationists like this guy are fixated on the good old-fashioned Great Chain Of Being, as if evolution was this process with the ultimate goal in human perfection. Sorry to break it to you Mogley, that's an extremely self-centered view that is not remotely indicative of how things actually work. No, worms do not work their way up the chain of being to evolve into humans, that is ridiculous. Worms are very well adapted being just what they are, we are not the envy of the entire animal kingdom.
Animals have evloved as best they could with what they had to work with to fit in to the niche that they occupy. It is because of this that there are constraints on evolution, and there are certain features of certain animals that are not what any intelligent being would design. Why the hell do koalas have upside-down pouches, so that their babies' heads poke downwards? That looks dangerous right? Why on earth do blind cavefish still have rudimentary, yet completely non-functional eyes? Why do whales have completely useless leg bone stubs attached to their pelvis? None of these things would make sense if we are to believe that all creatures were perfectly, intelligently designed.
Look, this is getting really old, really fast. All of his articles are 70% linking to other articles, so none of them actually get into any meat of any sort of argument stating any sort of fact. He likes to just say things with no backup, like
The actual similarity is between 70-87% not 99.8% as commonly believed. The original research stating 99.8% similarity was based on ignoring contradicting evidence
Really? You set up your own Human and Chimp Genome Sequencing Project? Great! Let's see your work!
Nowhere in these articles is there a modicum of argument, let alone a rational one. Every article so far can be summed up as this:
1. I have evidence, these laws of physics I just made up say so!
2. EINSTEIN WAS SUPER SMART AND HE BELIEVED ME SO THERE
3. Read all my other articles where I actually talk about these things in more detail! No really, I just need the page hits
4. There is evidence that evolutionists make stuff up! Trust me, there is, some other creationist dude on the internet said so. Faith remember? Have faith that I found out the errors in the science, no need for me to actually tell you how I found them.
4. I am so smart those fancy pants evolutionists wont even talk to me
I've had enough. I want some real answers from you Mogley. Are other "evolutionists" too chickenshit to talk to you? You've "successfully answered" many before? OK, riddle me this:
What makes you think that the big bang is incompatible with the theory of gravity?
Show your work demonstrating that the second law of thermodynamics also applies to an open system
How do you explain the presence of terrible design flaws in animals, like the vas deferens looping around the ureter, the upside down koala pouch or the leg bones in whales?
Why would there need to be "microevolution within kinds" if everything was designed perfectly by an all-knowing, totally awesome intelligent creator? If creation was perfect, why does it need to adjust?
Please explain, in a nutshell, the theory of evolution, so that I can at least assertain that you actually understand the theory that you claim you do not believe in.
I eagerly await your detailed, scientific answers. No copy and pasting allowed.