Difference between revisions of "Atheistic science"
m |
(Deleted the words "...and chaos" after claim that chaos was reliant upon probability. Chaotic systems are inherently deterministic; a large part of their definition) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Uncertainty and entropy == | == Uncertainty and entropy == | ||
| − | [[Atheistic science]] downplays or denies the central role played by uncertainty ([[quantum mechanics | + | [[Atheistic science]] downplays or denies the central role played by uncertainty ([[quantum mechanics]]) in the physical world. For a half-century, some scientists even refused to accept the truth of quantum mechanics. Overly narrow interpretations of the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]] is another characteristic of atheistic science. |
== Contradictions == | == Contradictions == | ||
Revision as of 15:43, September 25, 2014
Atheistic science is an approach to science that clings to atheistic views of the universe and life, at the complete exclusion of Biblical scientific foreknowledge and non-materialistic phenomena.
An example of atheistic science is its (absurd) insistence that remarkable migration by butterflies and birds can somehow be explained by magnetism.
Uncertainty and entropy
Atheistic science downplays or denies the central role played by uncertainty (quantum mechanics) in the physical world. For a half-century, some scientists even refused to accept the truth of quantum mechanics. Overly narrow interpretations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics is another characteristic of atheistic science.
Contradictions
Atheistic science is riddled with self-contradictions. A few examples are:
- atheistic science denies the existence of the unseen, while simultaneously admitting that the entire universe began from the unseen.
Pretended Completeness of Scientific Understanding
Isaac Newton, a devout Christian, knew that man only understood a small fraction of possible knowledge. But atheistic science pretends, implausibly, that it has a near-completeness of scientific understanding of the world. Its view is disproven by numerous counterexamples to its theories.