Got the following earlier today:
From: Buck Yancey buckyancey@comcast.net
Subject: The peanut butter argument
Let’s see: you believe that there was nothing, and then it exploded. [Wow!]He believes that, if you guys are right then there should and could be new life forms popping up everywhere, even from a glob of peanut butter. Do you not understand that he has really pulled your chain, but you are so up tight that you didn’t even catch the sarcasm?
Buck
I responded with the following:
Buck,
You don’t start off well when you begin with making assumptions about what I believe. That just makes you look arrogant. It also makes you look ignorant because it’s clear you don’t understand the theory you’re attacking.
Einstein showed us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Therefore to say that “nothing exploded” is, quite simply, wrong. The theory doesn’t even come close to claiming that’s what happened.
Sarcastic or not, the peanut butter argument is based on a strawman that has no basis on what the actual theory says. Not to mention that abiogenesis and The Big Bang Theory are two entirely different and unrelated theories.
Go off an read up a bit on the actual theories from actual scientists and not creationists before you open your mouth and stick your foot in it again. You’ll find there’s no unpleasant aftertaste that way.
Les
As per usual, Buck felt he already knew the theory well enough to not require studying up and opted to reply right away. I’ll post it below the fold.