Well you know Havoc, things truly
are complex. But that does not mean that they cannot be created naturally through simple factors. Well, simple by comparison, even those are complex. Our explanations fit your statement much more than the things they explain.
Hmm, I'm not sure how well I expressed that.
:
|
However, if someone finds irrefutable proof that God/ something else does exist, I'll believe it.
Proof=Belief.
|
1. Proof (by your meaning) emphatically does NOT equal belief.
2. No proof or evidence or anything else is irrefutable, in fact, irrefutability is a hallmark of being unscientific.
3. Proof. Is. Strictly. A. Mathematical. Concept.
:
|
The whole ecoysystems managed to be balanced untill we started to introduce speacies (Such as cane toads) but since then how come when a speacies migrates naturally, or moves due to changing climate or something, there isn't this unbalance?
|
There is imbalance. Extreme imbalance. Extinction event imbalance. Just look at what happened when North and South America became connected. Chaos! Equilibrium is achieved eventually, but there are many casualties along the way.
:
|
Then we have [everything in the known universe]
|
:
|
Oh, and then there's [everything in the unknown universe!]
|
1. Personal incredulity is not really a tenable position to maintain.
2. Just because science does not know something now, it does not mean that it shall never be known. What do you think all those scientists are doing right now? Playing shuffle-board?
3. The goal of science in not to answer all questions, only those that pertain to measurable physical reality. The choice of question becomes very important.
4. I'm sure I've said this already, but ignorance is important. Holes in our knowledge and understanding are valuable because they drive us to fill those holes through research and study, they drive science on. To whitewash over your ignorance kills that process stone dead, and the scientific method is all that keeps us from a second dark age. There may be questions for which human beings are uncomfortable not knowing the answers to, but we do ourselves a disservice to make up or accept any that have not been rigorously tested.
:
|
Anyway, there's a lot of thing science can't answer, think of it the other way, and if they can't answer it, you could turn the whole thing around and say, if we don't understand this, we may not even truely understand that, and anything can happen.
|
No you can't. Ignorance of one matter does not mean we are ignorant in another. It is true that anything in science could be falsified in an instant with the right observation (after verification of course) but until such an event it is both premature and foolish to assume that it will.
The only explanation for the nature of the universe that takes all the evidence into account and reconciles it all with Christianity is the following:
:
|
I am increasingly frustrated by the refusal of the scientific community to see the blindingly obvious. God created the universe and in the beginning things were quite simple and consisted only of what we can see and feel. Unfortunately for Him, He gave us not only free will but also curiosity. So for many thousands of years now, every time we get beneath the surface of a subject he has had to invent a new layer. In other words He is desperately making it up as He goes along.
If we can accept this, things will settle down and we will be able to save an awful lot of money and time in useless research.
|