Too Much Nonsense

Jul 19, 2011 Comments Off by

This particular video doesn’t seem to have accrued as many views as one would expect, given the nature of the topic and the way it’s discussed.

It has a mind-implodingly high density of arguments which don’t follow on from the previous one, which either makes it hilarious or depressing, depending on one’s outlook.

The first question that is asked by the atheist speaker is “How do you reconcile the concept of god in a universe which contains the second law of thermodynamics?”. This question alone is peculiar. The laws of thermodynamics are frequently hyped up to be more significant than they are. The second law is used so often as an analogy for causality, as it describes entropy and its necessity for irreversible processes. But like most analogies, it is not identical to the thing it describes. It seems likely that what the atheist is trying to say here is “How do you reconcile the concept of a god in a universe which obeys causality?”. But then, causality is a contestable law anyway.

But the question isn’t as mind-boggling as the answer. The answer should have been something along the lines of “Could you clarify the question?” But was instead, by using some religious babble, that the second law of thermodynamics exists because of Adam (brain implosion). Interestingly, apparently only the second law is caused by Adam, despite it being possible to combine the first and second laws of thermodynamics to make the fundamental law.

Quite rightly, the response to this drivel is a complete rejection of it.

Then the religious person seems to think that the rejection of his babble is because the contender simple doesn’t like to hear it. What?! No, it’s because it’s nonsense of the highest order. It makes no sense whatsoever. He then continues to try to win this street-debate by shouting more stuff from the bible, which as the atheist says quite rightly is irrelevant.

It is at this point that it becomes difficult to keep watching.

This street preacher seems to think that by demanding the definitions of the laws of thermodynamics he has some sort of authority over the contender, and the fact that it takes a while to explain these definitions is a sign of ignorance. He even resorts to arguing about the numbering of these laws when the atheist makes a simple mistake in naming them.

The most painful part of the video is when the street-preacher seems to be under the impression that scientists have time to be dealing with synonyms. He asks for another name for the zeroth law of thermodynamics, demanding an example from everyday life. As though the inability to conceptualise something means it can’t exist.

And he finishes it off with the debating signature of an idiot, that scientists who use technical terms are doing so to seem “more brilliant”. No. Just No.


About the author

I am the founder of Atheism Network.
Comments are closed.