I wanted to e-mail this to the person who runs the site but his link is broken to the e-mail so here it is in 2 parts



Have you ever really sat down with the attempt to understand some of these things about Christianity and God. You are way oversimplifying some complex issues in order to develop a straw man that you can tear down easily but you avoid all the real issues.

Not to mention some of your science as well as conclusions are very flawed specifically relating to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You totally are wrong on that issue. You quoted the elementary understanding but not a scientific understanding.

The second law of thermodynamics (also called the law of increasing entropy) actually has to do with the organization of matter. All things being equal, matter never moves from a lesser level of complexity to a higher form of complexity. Similar to if you throw a pebble in a lake the frequency and intensity will always become less from the center out never more intense.

The "open" or "closed" system is really only relevant to maintaining an existing system. As in winding a watch. No matter how much you wind it only keeps running, it doesn't grow legs and become a turtle.

The "open" or "closed" argument is actually an atheist cliché' that I often here from people desperate to believe that there is no God.

I tell you all this not because I desire to "condemn" you or convince you that you are "going to hell" I tell you this because you seem like an educated individual and once I was a lot like you (from what I can tell) I went on a scientific exploration to try and convince myself that there is no God using strict scientific method. I delved into quantum physics and quantum mechanics as well as several evolutionary and paleontology sciences.

The thing that cinched it for me in the end was pure statistics, perhaps the most irrefutable science of all. Numbers don't lie. Sherlock holms once said that "When we remove all the impossibilities, whatever remains, however unlikely---- must be the truth." (paraphrase)

Most evolutionists wont even argue that at the end of the day evolution is statistically impossible. It violates another mathematical law (one that most people never hear about especially in school) called the law of impossibility. It is the point where probability mathematics ends. Simply put it is stated that if something has to many variables ( more than 1 in 10 to the 50th power ) then it will never happen no matter how much time you have. That is to say if you have 500 dice in a bucket no matter how many times you fill the bucket and roll the dice it will never ever come up with 500 sixes. it is a mathematical impossibility.

Most mathematicians and evolutionists (including Darwin) feel that evolutionary probability to create even one random amino acid ( which is only a building block to life Not life ) is somewhere around 1 in 10 to the 500th power. The same is approximately true for even one successful random mutation. Which is the cornerstone of evolution. And we would need billions of those. You see evolution is a contrary to not just thermodynamics but also statistics and probability mathematics by a huge margin. That is unless you subscribe to the Chaos theory but that is real blind faith and still doesn't really deal with the issue.

I can give you at least a dozen other scientific models that make evolution impossible like molecular genetics and paleontology and geology as well. So then logically if evolution is scientifically impossible then whatever is left over must be truth..... If not accident then it must be design. if there is a design there must therefore be a designer. It is very logical at it's core.