Summations Only

In the Dog piling, Dog Piling I said this in Message 42:

quote:

---

The first ever EvC Great debate was when the pack's Pack Man Jar was to debate me, Buzsaw on the 3LoTs, whether my hypothetical creationist perspective satisfied the LoTs

​

There was to be two judges to judge the debate. Pack Man Jar boasted that he'd trounce the creationist man in a couple of messages. I was to compose the OP. The rest is history, Pack Man Jar calling it quits on page two. As for the judging, nary a peep.
Consensus: Pack Man Jar did poorly.

---

One of PaulK's responses in Message 43 was this:

quote:

---

And you managed a draw because you were fortunate enough to have a weak opponent. Despite the fact that your assertion is actually false.

---

It is not a draw when your opponent is on the defensive, most of the time on the ropes and counted out in page two when he called it quits. That is not a draw.Now, Paul claims that the reason I did not lose was that I had a weak opponent. OK, I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I would like to attempt a GREAT DEBATE with Cavediver, atheist apostate from Christianity, once professing to be an evangelical Christian.I believe that the reason I won that debate handily is that truth is like a lion. Turn it loose and it will prevail over just about anything. The truth lion is in some respects caged here on this site. Thus my sudden permanent bannings back then, having no suspensions previous and now my ouster from science now because I refuse to kowtow to debating on the terms of conventional science.Was it that Jar was a weak opponent or was it that my hypothesis satisfied the 3LoTs more-so than Jar's conventional science theory? Methinks, perhaps, the latter. I would like to see how it fairs with Cavediver, who we all respect as the site's most astute authority on the scientific methodologies, including the more complicated more abstract ones such as relativity and QM.Mind you, I'm not boasting, as Jar did before the debate ensued that I will win. Was PaulK right that my opponent was weak, or it is that the Biblical Buzsaw hypothesis is more compatible than Jar's conventional science theory?I'm not trying to be Mr smarty-pants. I'm thinking that the sort of arguments that defeated Jar can at least keep me on par or better with Cavediver in that they believe alike, pretty much on this topic.The topic will be Which satisfies the three basic 3Lot's the best, the Buzsaw literal rendering of the Genesis record or BB and the singularity events espoused by conventional science? I would do up an OP to kick it off. I would like to have two judges Lyx2no and ICANT if they would be agreeable, one representative of conventional science and one creationist. The judges could do some messaging among themselves and see how it would come out if they saw the need to. I am confident that these two members would be objective and fair, not that there would be others equally so, but these came to mind.I would like for this debate to be as slow and casual as need be, in that this is a very busy time for me and in that I will likely need to do some research. I will need to pray and think a lot, perhaps before moving forward, being a slow thinker and having no college degree etc. Sometimes when I pray, in the middle of the night's wee hours God's light bulb lights up in my mind, how to respond to difficult challenges.Imo, logic can go a long way, coupled with prayer and some basic knowledge of how the 3Lots apply. If Jehovah be the true ID majestic manager of the Universe, Jehovah be the ultimate source of truth and knowledge. He's revealed himself to me in wonderful ways, as he promised, something like, "you draw near to me and I will draw near to you, and "Jehovah's eyes walk to and fro throughout the earth, showing himself strong on behalf of those whose heart is perfect towards him." II Chronicles 16:9(NOTE: I ran out of spaces in my Title so I left out an "is" and abreviated "Temporal" to "Temp")
Edited by Buzsaw, : Cap Great Debate.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

But the consensus of PaulK and others is that the reason I won that debate is that Jar was a weak contender and not that my hypothesis best complied with the LoTs.That debate was a long time ago. A new debate with the cite's most prestigious physicist would either support or falsify the consensus that the reason I won the debate was a weak opponent; (ABE: not that my creationist hypothesis is more compatible with the basic laws of science, more-so than the theories of conventional science. ) Over time I have learned some things and made some adjustments in my understanding of science and the Genesis record, relative to this topic. That may have a bearing on some debating in the Peanut Gallery as well as how my arguments are aired.I wonder what Cavediver thinks about this proposal. If he is confident that the conventional science theories on origins are so great and that ID Genesis stuff is totally unscientific, let him show his stuff whereas the allegedly weak opponent failed. Edited by Buzsaw, : as noted by color

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

My understanding of the Great Debate forum is that it is not a science forum. It appears that admins are afraid for their science Goliath, Cavediver's ability to debate against the creationist deadly sling stone hypothesis of little David, Buzsaw.Cavediver, what say you about a Great Debate; not to defy admins, but I'd like to know whether you would favor a Great Debate between you and me on the challenge posed?The problem with the open forum debate is the dogpiling factor. A one on one with EvC's physist is what is needful. It appears that the secularists are afraid they will loose on their 2nd shot at falsifying the Buzsaw Hypothesis on origins and science. The facade of their unscientific theories is telling here.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This is just one example of how my hypothesis has been adjusted and fine tuned since the first Great Debate and why a new Great Debate with a stronger opponent is needful. My position now has been updated to an unknown amount of non-infinite energy but all limited to that of the source, requiring work and rest by the source so as to manage the energy, compatible to 2LoT. If Jehovah's energy were infinite, there would be no need of rest.Biblically, Jehovah is almighty, in that he controls/manages all available energy existing in the Universe.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This topic is about the basic laws of science which I am well aware of. How do you think I trounced educated and science apprised Jar if he knew more about the LoTs than I?I am fully aware of the rules of the game. What you people appear to be really afraid for is that I know too much real science for you to risk a Great Debate between me and your best player. No?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

You're assuming no ID infinite source (I say source) of work fitting the Biblical record in the infinite universe. 2LoT allows for work without specificity.The ID source of work, i.e. Jehovah, via rest and via the multipresent Holy Spirit would receive energy from the system, gathering energy from forces within the system. This would entail no need for an infinite amount (I say amount) of emergu, the amount of energy always remaining the same as per 1LoT. The Biblical record depicts the designer as managing the universe by creating and destroying things in the universe to suit the designer/creator's purpose.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

When I embarked on this debate, I assumed it to be a one on one, allowing for casual participation, due to my very busy life. Since that didn't happen, the participants in this thread will just have to be patient. My time available for responses is not infinite, but extremely temporal.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

The topic is about how the Biblical record is compatible with the basic Lots. It is not restricted to a secularistic application of science, though there is plenty of physical evidence which I have cited over the years that the Biblical god, Jehovah exists in our Universe.None of this, of course will strictly secular minded folks like you ever admit to, no matter how empirical or how much is cited.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

It's high time to air some ways which the conventional science theories are not compliant to the LoTs.The alleged singularity, followed by an alleged BB depict a temporal universe, incompatible with 1Lot, in that energy is never created or destroyed. 1LoT is compatible to the Biblical eternal energy system.The alleged chaotic singularity event, the BB and the ToE all defy 2LoT, in that there is no source of work within the system, yet evidence of work is observed, rendering the unorganized sub-microscopic compacted universe capable of expanding into all of the order and complexity observed. This defies all logic and reality, implicating ID work when there is none available within the system.The Biblical system best satisfies the chaos to order via ID work cited.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

I need to remind all that the topic of this thread is which is more compatible to the Lots, the Buzsaw unique rendition of the Genesis record regarding origins, being a literal rendition or the conventional science theories of the alleged singularity event, followed by the alleged BB and the ToE.The topic should not be restricted to a secularistic application of science. Though I have cited physical evidence of the existence of Jehovah, it is a given that no secularist minded member will be expected to acknowledge any of it.I am a true Biblical creationist. That involves the meta-physical, coupled with the physical, both shown to be existing in the universe.
Imo, it is disingenuous for members to personally attack me in this thread, given the nature of it.The thread is not about me. I refer to the first person some, because of my unique literalistic rendition of the Genesis record, not depicting YEC, etc.The thread is not about debating evidence. That has been debated in other threads. It is a debate on which position is more compatible to the basic laws of science, the LoTs. It does not necessarily mean that either position must comply 100% to the LoTs, but which position is most compatible to the LoTs.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Taq, you have quote mined one small sentence from my message so as to obfuscate the message and demean the messenger.You and others responding to this message need to read, carefully, the contents below before misconstruing the message into something other than my point.

quote:

---

I need to remind all that the topic of this thread is which is more compatible to the Lots, the Buzsaw unique rendition of the Genesis record regarding origins, being a literal rendition or the conventional science theories of the alleged singularity event, followed by the alleged BB and the ToE.
The topic should not be restricted to a secularistic application of science. Though I have cited physical evidence of the existence of Jehovah, it is a given that no secularist minded member will be expected to acknowledge any of it.

​

I am a true Biblical creationist. That involves the meta-physical, coupled with the physical, both shown to be existing in the universe.
Imo, it is disingenuous for members to personally attack me in this thread, given the nature of it.

---

The term, science is not necessarily secularistic. If a metaphysical realm of beings exist in the universe, scientific study and debate can be engaged in so as to determine whether or not such entities exist.This thread is intended to determine whether the Biblical metaphysical paradigm or the conventional paradigm on origins best accommodate the basic thermodynamic laws which are observed in the universe.Thus, you and the others responding to my message need to understand and acknowledge that this debate is not limited to the secularistic application of science.This is also why, imo, creationists should be allowed to size up our paradigm against that of the secularists in the science forums. With that restriction, half of our minds are tied behind us as Rush Limbaugh puts it.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Hi Straggler. Thanks for weighing in and citing the closed archived thread.I assume your question relates to Message 1. To my recollection, I've never advocated an open system which entailed any out-of -universe energy.My position has consistently been that Jehovah, the source of energy dwells with his entourage of angelic beings within the Universe system, managing the system to suit his purpose, eternally.The OP of that thread, Message 1 clearly states that the amount of energy in the system never increases or decreases. What made you think otherwise?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Crashfrog, two things. If I be boring, why do threads which I engage in get the intensity red lines appear quite consistently?If I tend to slink off, why do threads which I engage go on and on? There comes a time to stop beating dead horses and leave off debating any topic. No?A third point: When have any of you secularist athiestic types ever admitted to any evidence supportive to the Biblical record in the 8 years that I've been here? LoL, it's a given. It will never happen, no matter how accurate or supportive to my paradigm it be. You, the admins supportive to your POV and all secularist members here know it. It's an established matter of fact.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Hi ICANT. Sorry good bud, but this notion of yours that Jehovah and his the creatures around him in his throne abode are out of this Universe is nonsense and totally contrary to scripture, which says repeatedly that he and his angels are in the heavens/cosmos, the man/saviour/lord of us sitting on the right hand of his throne. Jesus comes in the heavens. He arose into the heavens/cosmos. Michael and Gabriel are in the heavens. Satan will be or has been cast from the cosmos/heavens to planet earth in these last days. All of that, good bud, is indicative that Jehovah exists within this closed system Universe.You and I, contrary to Cavediver's implication are totally on a different wave link. You are advocating an open system Universe whereas the Buzsaw Biblical literal hypothesis is that it's a closed system. The literal application of the term, uni-verse implies one/uni system, inclusive of all that exists.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

You had better re-read me, Straggler. I said what I believer to be true that 2LoT allows for an indeterminate amount of work which can regulate the equilibrium. If you read the link into my OP with the Buz Jar debate in 08, you see more clearly my position regarding 2LoT which is that via work, Jehovah, the source of energy releases energy into the system but he also receives renewal energy in various manners from the system. One example is his need to rest after working the creation out of Genesis one. The other one I cited in this thread is where Jesus, though he didn't see the woman do it, asked "who did this?. I felt energy/virtue leave me." when the woman was healed who secretly touched his garment. he reconfigures in many ways. That's what I meant by managing the universe, creating. destroying and recreating, etc. Jesus and his apostles said the world would be eventually destroyed and there will be new heavens and earth, the present heavens changed etc. The particulars of it all are not given.I think we all know that things are changing on this planet. Hang onto your hat. It's just begun. Things will change relatively fast from her on in every manner, politically, weather wise, morally (for the worse), religiously, ( Islam prevailing for the short haul, Vatican City soon burns in an hour, leaving Muslims allied with Russia, Germany and North Africa, etc as the super powers, China and the Eastern Orientals waiting in the wind to move West into the Armageddon foray in the end, all ending up slaughtering each other as per Ezekiel 38, 39 etc. ,--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.