bnorton wrote:
His name is “The Evil Emperor Palpatine.”
And, yes, I’m pretty sure “Evil” is part of his name. Sorta like “The Evil Galactic Empire” and “The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants.” 
—The “watch maker” idea has a name. Its called Deism. It has nothing to do with some schmuck walking down some path. It has everything to do with the creation of basic laws for life, the universe, and everything.—
No, it is just the watch maker argument, the most famous example of the argument from design. Some Deists make it, but not all. It was given its name because of Paley’s famous example of a watch on the beach: but there were deists long before Paley (who was not a deist, not that it matterss), and indeed the argument itself was decisively trounced by Hume long before Paley, and even more decidely refuted by Darwin (who demostrated a plausible means by which the work of a mind could be done without one).
—Science tells us that for every action there is a reaction. Now, “action” and “reaction” can become confusing (ie: my girlfriend left me because…) so confine it only to the current realm of Science. In this respect even the Big Bang is merely an artifact.—
Not necessarily. The problem is that the universe is the place in which we observe these seeming things (actions and reactions, causes and effects). But that does not logically entitle us to generalize those laws to the very context in which they have meaning (the universe).
—2) Borrowing from Mendal I believe that Science is nothing more than finding out God works.—
That may be your (and Mendel’s) belief, but that is an additional assumption, not necessary to doing science.
—Anyways, we have discovered lots of Laws and Theories. And one is called Entropy; the ultimate decay into a “gray” energy. From a macroscopic perspective we can confirm this. And the 2nd Law of Thermdyamics confirms it. And yet Life exists.—
Yes, but it will not always persist, exactly as the 2nd law requires. Aside from that, entropy does not speak for or against life anymore than it speaks for or against nuclear fusion of elements in the heart of stars.
—Consider: if we have discerned a fundemental “law” of the Universe what “power” could possibly ignore it? God, maybe?—
You are completely confused about what laws are. Laws can only be confirmed by observation of the universe: and if additional observation finds exceptions, the law would be thrown out. If life really seemed to violate that law, it wouldn’t BE a law anymore, end of story. That’s how science works. But in fact it does NOT violate that law, anymore than floating dust in the air defies gravity. Dust in the air, or helium balloons, might seem to violate the law of gravity: but in fact not only do they not, but understanding how dust or balloons float in midair leads us to a deeper understanding of that law, just like life leads us to a deeper understanding of entropy.
—What separates Life from Death is whether something is growing or decaying. Everything that is alive takes in chaos and creates order, in defiance of the “law” of entropy.—
This is NOT in defiance of the law. Indeed, you seem to be confused as to what the law actually is.
—And then there’s Gravity. While our “law” of Entropy throws everything away from itself, gravity draws it back. A little interesting maybe?—
How so? Entropy doesn’t “throw everything away from itself” in any such simple sense. It means that more energy is always lost in any reaction than is gained.
If you are suggesting that the mere fact that the universe HAS regularities (which we, as observers, try to identify as “laws”) demonstrates that there is an ordering mind, you should be aware that this argument has severe flaws.
But before even getting to those flaws, even if we DO believe that god created the laws necessary for life, you hit the troubling implication that any such artifice diminishes god’s will, not enhances it. At every turn, it paints a god as needing to rely on particular designs, due to the increasing number of forced moves made necessary by each successive choice. This leaves god, at best, as a lawfinder (simply finding out what combinations work best logically), not a lawmaker. As JS Mill noted, all-powerful beings shouldn’t have NEED of “artifice” to do their will.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html
For those interested in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and why Creationists don’t understand what they are saying.
Excellent refutation, Apos.
[Mathematician hat]
pi =4 * ( 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + … )
is perfectly accurate. If you don’t like ‘…’ sa
pi = 4 * SUM { (-1)^n / (2n+1) | n non-negative integer }
(It’s not possible to express pi without some infinite expansion in decimal notation, but there’s nothing special about decimal notation. There are notations where pi can be expressed finitely.)
[/Mathematician Hat]
BTW, why is this relevant?
Like my personal favorite:
pi = 10
In base pi, of course.
Tenebras, who never seems to take his mathematician hat off as it goes so well with Hawaiian print shirts… 