Summations Only

saved for revision later
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

What is a model for all of the above that would satisfy the three basic LoTs? Cite one and show your source.

The only model of the BB expansion I've ever known is a balloon, which is a 2d one supposedly modeling a 3d Universe. That does not model my statement describing the BB. Is that all you have? Are there any others, or is your illogical abstract theory bankrupt bunk I don't know of any. If you, Cavediver or any one else had one it'd have been aired by now in this thread.

All that is observable about math models is on paper or a screen. The predictions of the math on the BB fail to predict what is observed by the physical eye. That's what I mean by abstract and illogical.That's why the only visible model you have is a admittedly inadequate 2d balloon, illogically depicting a 3d universe. That's why your paradigm must needs be based on abstract illogical conceptional as opposed to visible.The Buzsaw model for ID involves all that is observed and what is compatible with the basic LoTs; that energy is not created, i.e. eternal, that order and complexity eventually equalizes into less disorder and complexity, aside from work/design/ID management etc.I can name numerous visible models, supportive to ID. For example, the computer, which via ID was created from chaotic and disordered material, elements and forces which mankind has planned, and created by designYour illogical, conceived and abstract math model predicts the opposite of what is observed in the real Universe. We do not observe disorder naturally void of intelligent design emerge into order and complexity. Something that models the working watch emerging from a scrap yard naturally, or the un-kept barn from deteriorating and falling down aside from ID maintenance, for examples.

Exactly! That's what happened to you and the other sheeple who've been dumbed down throughout all of your education since a kid. Once they dumbed you down, they indoctrinated you into believing their illogical, abstract and unobservable mystical magic math, like the illusionist magician who wows the audience masterfully.That's why you can believe the once submicroscopic hot Universe naturally and progressively allegedly morphed itself into all of the wonders of complexity and order we now observe , defying the tennants of logic, reality, entropy, and the LoTs. The real junk science, it is.That's why you dumbed down sheeple can believe that primordial chaotic live-less soup allegedly progressed bio-genetically into life, surviving it's alleged beginnings naturally into all of the wonderment of complex systems we observe, again defying all logic, reason and reality.

Well, you see Dr Jones, it's like the professional magician illusionist. The illusionist appears to be doing feats beyond reality or logic. He appears to be sawing the lady in the box in two without harming her, when in the world of reality such phenomena is not observed.The dumbed down sheeple, via inadequate analogies, as Straggler described them, become indoctrinated into believing abstract mathematical theories which run counter to what is observed in real life, such as millions of years of disorder naturally progressing steadily into order and lifeless chaotic soup progressing steadily into billions of living creatures and plant life, all possessing complex systems beyond the ability of the human mind to fully comprehend.The 39 intelligent educated Heaven's Gater cult which merged science fiction with religion are an example of how powerful deception can be over time.This is not to say that conventional science is anywhere near the level of this group, but to make my point that deception is capable of that level relative to intelligent folks.

Your analogy is a strawman. A model depicting the BB and zero event must be compatible with the observable basic laws of science. There is no such model for the above events whereas no model is necessary as evidence that the discovery and production of the GPS system happened. LOL, nobody has been capable of observing a genesis of the Universe. Scientists can only theorize their pre-conceived beliefs.There is ample supportive corroborating evidence that such a supernatural entity exists and the 2nd law does not necessarily rule out the possibility of such an entity effecting decreased entropy via work.BB advocates assume uniformity in that things in the observable Universe are expanding. There is no model to show that that has been so from the beginning of space and time in the alleged zero event.OTO there are models depicting things expanding and contracting via intelligently designed work.

Larni, this response is your same ole substance-less type, trying to stuff me into your own limited secularistic ideological mindset regarding the workings of the laws of science.I've shown why your renditions of the LoTs are incompatible to these basic laws of science, beginning with the first law. This typical response of yours and others fail to falsify my allegations. I do understand enough of it to know better. It's not your false charge that I don't understand it. It's that I don't buy into what goes counter to the laws of science, as you sheeple have been indoctrinated into. You know, Larni, that shoe can fit on the feet any and all of us here, depending on ideology. That's why Percy originally, I say originally named this cite. EvC, i.e. evolution vs creationism.Someone wisely said something like, "Be sure the fool you're fooling with is a fool before fooling with a fool."

No, Straggler, that is not my position. I've said it before and I will repeat it. This is why Jehovah, the entity, as per the Genesis record rested after the work he had done.That's why Jesus, after healing the woman with the issue of blood secretly touched his garment for healing, said, "Who touched me? I perceive that virtue/energy came from me." Jesus, the son of Jehovah, who consistently performed many supernatural miracles during his ministry, regularly rested.I've explained in other threads that likely there is a give and take of energy from the source of energy, the entity, and that which is being managed in the Universe. Heat and light are likely factors in this.Of course, as is the case in all scientific hypotheses & theories, there are knowns from which to hypothesise and to research. There are also unknowns to be researched, which must be corroborated by the knowns, so as to warrant any given hypothesis.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To answer both questions, the total (I say total) amount remains constant, the managing source of energy existing within Universe; the Universe itself being the only existing perpetual machine, i.e. eternal, if you will.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, Straggler. Of course not. Either you did not read my position carefully, as stated in Message 176 or you choose to ignore important aspects of it.

quote:

---

I've said it before and I will repeat it. This is why Jehovah, the entity, as per the Genesis record rested after the work he had done.

​

That's why Jesus, after healing the woman with the issue of blood secretly touched his garment for healing, said, "Who touched me? I perceive that virtue/energy came from me." Jesus, the son of Jehovah, who consistently performed many supernatural miracles during his ministry, regularly rested.

​

I've explained in other threads that likely there is a give and take of energy from the source of energy, the entity, and that which is being managed in the Universe. Heat and light are likely factors in this.

---

Perhaps I need to explain to you what I meant by "give and take." There are periods of increased entropy and periods of decreased entropy in many areas within the immense closed system which we call the Universe. How can you call such a system a continual reversal of entropy, when, in fact that counters what I said? There you go with the "even you" again, like so many other demeaning comments on this thread from debate counterparts, resorting to personal demeanour when unable to refute.If you read thoughtfully what I said, it should be obvious to you, Cavediver and the rest that the unique Buzsaw model is indeed compatible with the laws of thermodynamics, whereas yours, Cave-divers and the rest are not.I've stated my Buzsaw Hypothesis as per this and other threads, airing it, not only for this site, but to say that there is no creationist hypothesis as compatible with the 3 Lots and the Buzsaw Hypothesis, especially YECs who fail to explain how an eternal creator god can exist in a temporal Universe. That's why I regard it as uniquely credible, doggedly standing by it. That's why it's difficult for even physicists and cosmologists to refute it. That's why it's scientific.

Because it is science; just not totally secularist in nature. It involves some aspects of the secularistic science method as well as corroborative scientific evidence of the managing entity. Hooah, you might get more responses if you would take a lesson from Straggler, et al. Learn some lessons as to how to respond to messages respectfully and with sensible substance. Note how good spirited and having substance his messages, for the most part, are compared to yours. As Jesus suggested, remove the beam from your own eye before complaining of the sliver in another's.

Note, carefully, in context, that word within. of your quote of me.I agree. The entropy of the entire Universe never decreases. It just happens within the closed system.If some of the pressure in a tire (existing in the Universe) is released, equalization is effected relative to the inside of the tire and the outside of it. If, by work, the tire is re-inflated, a reversal of pressure is effected relative to the inside and outside of it.The managing entity and the tire, in a sense, are analogous, relative to entropy, both existing within the Universe.

Hi Son. Thanks for weighing in on this debate. I am doing some reading up and getting thoughts together for responses to this and your previous message. Please bear with me for a forth-coming response to these. My time on the computer is very limited.

Let's back up. Where did I say the entropy of the entire universe only ever increases? Is that what you're implying, that I said that, or are you simply repeating your position which I have effectively countered?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------