It is said that 'truth' is the first casualty in war.. well in connection with the confrontation between creationists and evolutionists.. that is no overstatement.. it is a war, which will be fought to the metaphorical 'death' of one or the other. I don't like to can anyone as an 'ist' but in this case there is no simpler way to put it. There are lots of people who don't fit either but these are the key players.
I want the TRUTH. I don't hide my theistic world view, just lower its flag (to half mast if you like)... remembering the poor buggers who fall attempting to advance under a hail of misinformation or get left disfigured by the shrapnel from massive deceit). Its no compromise for me because God, according to the bible is the truth. So my aim is to simplify technical jargon, eliminate technobabble and expose what is false.
Academic papers are privy to the person who writes them and the organisation for whom they work. As such unless you are 'in the club' you cannot get easy access to such other than the published abstract or when a book or appropriate magazine article is published giving that information. However the Wikipedia is the place where the battle generates the most 'heat'.. and one particular subject is pivotal to victory or defeat.. The Second Law of Thermodynamics. This is the 'Hastings' for the empire of secular science based on Darwinian Evolution.
There are a number of key words for which a clear and unambiguous definition is pivotal to the understanding this law.. Entropy is one. In the Wikipedia the topics are.. Entropy, Introduction to Entropy, Entropy Disambiguation and in a Plain English version.. here are some quotes.
Introduction to Entropy
First Paragraph
"... I think the present (9 am PST, 26 October is good, but too dense, too many ideas per paragraph ..."
Entropy what is it?
"What IS entropy? I want to have a simple definition: Entropy is "blah
and blah". I do not care about what it is "central" to, or what it is
"related" to. "Entropy is a thermodynamic quantity" is a good start -
but it says nothing as to what it MEANS."
You get the picture..
Sunday, 25 May 2014
Friday, 16 May 2014
1 The Problem
This is all about what I rather cautiously omitted to say in "The God Law".. Its now time to tell it like it is. My journey into the depths of the Second Law grew ever more strange as I progressed from one startling revelation to another. The comparison between what I was reading in the general texts summarizing the current state of 'knowledge' on the subject and what I came up with from my own research was deeply disturbing. It was not so much that the material was obscure by virtue of its mathematical or logical complexity but that it appeared deliberately to be made so. The Wikipedia article on the Second Law summarises the appalling mess being used to cover up the truth.
This fact, obvious to any reasonably educated reader of it, should alert you to the existence of a problem. Something, someone finds far too inconvenient to tell, is being concealed. Now the dark secret is obviously the true understanding of the Second Law, but why should this pose such a problem for science? Well I think its rather obvious their science is not just science its naturalistic secular science which cannot as an a priori accept any non material entity. So if I manage to reveal to you the details of the conspiracy, I would suggest that in itself means you will 'know' that those responsible for the confusion 'know' there really is a non material entity responsible for the universe. Now if your world view is shown to be false.. that I would suggest is much more than having to come to terms with a new theory, its massively devastating and obviously too difficult to accept. The stuff of paradigms. The only question for you is do you really want to know about this?
In any rational presentation of scientifically determined conclusions it is imperative that the terms used are clearly and rigorously defined. I am here to tell you that has not occurred concerning the scientific communities answer to the question:
How did we get here?
So what's missing?
This fact, obvious to any reasonably educated reader of it, should alert you to the existence of a problem. Something, someone finds far too inconvenient to tell, is being concealed. Now the dark secret is obviously the true understanding of the Second Law, but why should this pose such a problem for science? Well I think its rather obvious their science is not just science its naturalistic secular science which cannot as an a priori accept any non material entity. So if I manage to reveal to you the details of the conspiracy, I would suggest that in itself means you will 'know' that those responsible for the confusion 'know' there really is a non material entity responsible for the universe. Now if your world view is shown to be false.. that I would suggest is much more than having to come to terms with a new theory, its massively devastating and obviously too difficult to accept. The stuff of paradigms. The only question for you is do you really want to know about this?
In any rational presentation of scientifically determined conclusions it is imperative that the terms used are clearly and rigorously defined. I am here to tell you that has not occurred concerning the scientific communities answer to the question:
How did we get here?
So what's missing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)