Dear Professor Dawkins,
Yes, hello.
Tiny atoms & sub atomic particles make up everything, yet they are not alive, so even if we were to assemble ourselves from atoms, we would not be alive but just corpses.
Prove it.
The miracle of life can only come from a Creator God.
Baseless assertion.
No new species are appearing, and no new species has ever been documented. So it appears that 'mother nature' is better at distinguishing lifve than creating it.
False. For example, the Nylon Bug:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nylon-eating_bacteriaEarth is in just the right place relative to the right type of star & is the right type of planet to support life. Is it just a lucky fluke that the universe is finely tuned for life?
99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the universe is hostile to life.
99% of the Earth alone is hostile to human life.
You call that fine tuning?
Genesis 22 v 17 & Psalm 147 v 4 tells us that the stars are limitless.
Science tells us otherwise.
Job 26 v 7 tells us that he hangs the earth on nothing.
Your bible actually says otherwise:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htmRegardless, science tells us the Earth is "grounded" by other planets.
Isiah 40 v 22 tells us that the earth is round.
Your bible actually says otherwise:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htmRegardless, the Earth is not round; it's a sphere. It's not even a sphere, but an ellipsoid.
How would the writers of the Bbile know such things, if not God-inspired? Especially when such religions believed that the earth rested on turtles backs etc.
First, the bible is wrong about all those things. Second, China already had literacy, astronomy, and gunpowder without the aid of divine revelation. Third, you are ignorant of what other religions at the time believed.
A number of athiestic scientists are continually modifying evolution to keep it alive in the face of a barrage of new evidence against it. This holds back true science as everything is made to conform to an incorrect theory. If evolution did occur, it would have happened in other worlds.
It doesn't matter whether a scientist is a theist or atheist. Furthermore, if evolution by natural selection turns out to be false, it doesn't follow that creationism is true.
Population growth of 0.5% gives present population from Noah's time. If man has existed for millions of years, 300 000 000 000 000 people have lived even with a zero growth rate. They have left no trace of their existence, no fossils, no bones, no buildings, no culture - nothing!
Don't use bad math and big numbers to prove anything. Ever.
Apart from the Bible, many ancient civilisations have flood stories similar to the Biblical account.
The Bible plagiarized those stories (and every other story it could).
It has been demonstrated that some creatures cannot arise from evolutionary progression.
False.
Everyone accepts the ability of species to adapt to their environment, but species crossing species barriers & becoming another species is nonsense. Mutations are cited as the cause of new species but are usually sterile, pointing to an intelligent designer designing stability into the system preventing reproduction of defective creatures.
Your personal incredulity, poor understanding of genetics, and inability to fathom vast timescales are not an argument against evolution.
All the missing links found have eventually proved to be either men or monkeys or hoaxes.
What is a missing link and what should it look like?
It's not just a missing link between men & monkeys, but millions of missing links between all species. There is not one single example of a transitional form that has ever been found & proved valid. There should be billions of examples in the fossil record, however, we see everything fully formed.
False.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossilMan creates computers and artificial intelligence, yet our most powerful computer has less intelligence than a worm,
False.
so how are we to suppose totally random processes are capable of producing complex organs, species & life?
By first understanding that they are not totally random.
Sir Frederick Hoyle was not a Christian, but calculated the chance of forming life from inanimate matter to be one raised to the power of a number with 40,000 naughts after it & stated "it's enough to bury Darwin & the whole theory of evolution." To show what a large number this is, there are estimated to be only ten to the power of 80 electrons in our vast universe, and it's easier to find a single electron in the universe.
Don't use bad math and big numbers to prove anything. Ever.
Darwin had many doubts about his own theories, and admitted that we can't prove one species has changed. He made many wrong assumptions, and assumptions & suppositions are not science. Science deals with fact.
Ehh, I don't know about any of that, but disproving evolution doesn't prove creationism in any case.
Later in life, Darwin realised the truth in the many arguments scientists leveled against it, and saw the serious flaws & he abandoned evolution.
Ehh, I don't know about any of that, but it's irrelevant.
The law of cause & effect - that the cause must be equal to or greater than the effect, so something which is dead cannot produce something living.
You are mischaracterizing Newton's Third Law of Motion and then applying it beyond its context.
There is nothing within the universe capable of its creation, it can only be an external God.
The universe is not within itself; why can't the universe create itself?
To create order, design & energy is used to complete the process
Only energy, actually, and sometimes systems self-organize as a result of depleted energy. Entropy is neat.
- energy needs wisdom & skill.
This statement is adultered nonsense.
Man cannot come out of nothing by itself.
Nobody ever said that.
Design, skill & energy are required to create something, and that with time order flows to chaos. Evolution is the opposite, suggesting that with time life becomes more ordered, moving to higher levels.
No, the Second Law of Thermodynamics states that without energy, a closed system will tend toward disorder. Evolution does not happen within a closed system; the sun provides energy.
Explosions do not produce order, but are destructive processes producing chaos. We cannot get the highly ordered universe we see, from a 'big bang'.
The Big Bang was not an explosion; it was a rapid expansion of space.
Rock strata showing simple creatures at the bottom and man at the top, does not indicate evolutionary progression. At the time of a great flood, the simple creatures & fish would be buried first, mammals would run to high ground, and men & monkeys would climb trees.
False, though I this is the first time I heard the tree-climbing argument. Thanks for the belly laugh.
If the universe is winding down, aren't we to assume that someone had to wind it up?!
Or some
thing, which may or may not be the universe itself.
Why do we assume that God has to be created?
Why do you assume the universe has to be created?
God is existence. God is uncreated, the universe was created by him. God is both inside & outside of the universe, along with time.
Great definition. How do you start with that and conclude that this God you've defined is also the masculine Yahweh from the Bible who hates fags? Show your work.
If matter & energy was always there, there must be something eternal.
Perhaps energy is eternal.
I hope that you will ponder on the contents of this email, and recognise its truth.
I hope you will get a proper education.
Best wishes.
