Wired Article Response

The cover of November’s Wired magazine featured “The New Atheists.”

Obviously, there were going to be many letters in response… but were the letters angry? Were all the Wired editors told they’re going to hell?

Nope. They got very little brimstone. And more response than ever before. They talk about the reactions here.

They also posted every received letter here.

Some random comments from the page:

Since I’m a Christian and a life member of Mensa I was surprised to learn that religion was only for the ignorant.

Furthermore, we can also use science to prove that evolution is in fact impossible.

No one wants to agree with an asshole, even if he’s right.

Enjoy.


[tags]Wired, The New Atheists, atheist, atheism, Christian, God, religion, MENSA[/tags]

  • Graham

    It is somewhat frightening to me that a guy who is making decisions which affect nature seems to have such an awful understanding of science. But then again there are doctors who also don’t understand science, so…I’m just plain scared, often.

    Please don’t dog on this guy. Really think clearly for a second. No one has to understand these law’s to do most work. You probably wouldn’t even need to understand the full implications of these laws if you were a rocket scientist. Maybe that is a little exaggerated, but really only scientist researching black holes in outerspace need to know this stuff in the depth that we are talking about. Respect the man’s job. I wouldn’t dog on some atheist saying he couldn’t do his job just because he didn’t understand something he doesn’t need to know. I am sure this guy plugs in E=MC^2 in to his calculator everyday to calculate stuff on resources. (sarcasm) Give him a break.
    I am a Christian and I want to throw out there that I believe that the Big Bang could have happened and in fact, with really only one change, the BB completely works with the idea of God. Let us not just throw God out of the window for something that doesn’t disprove Him. Just because the BB theory isn’t creationism as we humans see it doesn’t mean that God is only on the creationism side and God is not on the BB side of things.
    So you’re probably wondering if I am retarded and that is just because I haven’t gotten to explain it yet, but first I would like to say that I could be wrong, I could have already said something wrong, I am willing to admit I was wrong and I am open for discussion.
    So, I saw some discussion earlier about:

    but all energy ever in this universe started existing at the BB.

    However, this law breaks down when the laws of physics break down, such as at the event horizons of black holes and at the time immediately following the Big Bang.

    Science says everything goes from order to disorder

    order turns into disorder. However, this process can be stopped (albeit it temporarily) by the addition of energy.

    -Yes, energy/work can stop and reverse disorder.

    Order can increase in the local environment, like crystal growth.

    -In this situation, the crystals are usually under pressure and/or temperature, which is adding work/energy to the system.

    So, this is what I say:
    In the beginning I believe that something had to even start the BB. Why do we never look at what started the BB. We can never explain that. Also, we always say since we can’t explain how God got there; we can’t believe there is a God. Well, how did the BB get there? We can’t answer that either, so should we throw that out? And even if you can explain one more step before the BB of how it came to be, you will always run into the problem of explaining how that step came to be. Example: Where did the BB come from? It came from energy, which we know can be transformed into mass. Well, now where did the energy come from? I don’t know but I guess someone could say it came from a black hole. Then where did the black hole come from and where did the energy come from in the black hole? Basically at this point you are calling the black hole god, in a sense. (The last sentence might not make the most sense but just a thought)
    Now, I think that God was behind the scenes of the BB or at least it is a possibility, and this means that Evolution with an adjustment (God being behind the scenes of the BB) does not disprove that there is a God. I think He could have created the original energy or mass or whatever that started the BB.
    Now that brings us to the next point. I think, I am not sure, but I think He had to be there through the whole evolution process.
    Yes, everything does not go to disorder. Yes, everything does go to disorder if work/energy is not put into the system. So, in our situation we have this energy ball thing at the beginning of the BB, well just because we have a lot of energy doesn’t mean that it will necessarily go to order. But just like the work equation, work=force*distance, the force has to be parallel to the distance moved. It has to be directed in the right direction to get work. Also, just like in all the models that are shown to describe this law, you can see that work doing the opposite task can speed up the process of going to disorder. The law doesn’t say that things have to go to order when energy is present, but they are able to.
    Therefore, I suggest that God not only has to at least create the energy/mass ball, but also has to be there directing everything so that these complex things can be made. As an example of the complexity of things, there is the amazing fact that there are an estimated 100 billion neurons in the brain or let us look at the amazing complexity of DNA which writes the plan and operation for our whole body.
    Through all this I am not saying that pure creationism is not right, I just don’t think we can tell if it is right or not. Also, to summarize I think evolution does not disprove that there is a God.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X