Ok, here’s round two of my interjection into the debate between Way of the Master and the Rational Response Squad. Brian “Sapient” of The Rational Response Squad took the idea of creation pointing to a creator to task. Comfort had tried to use the idea that because we have a creation, there must be a creator. Every painting, he argued, is painted by an artist. We don’t see a painting and assume that it just formed over long periods of time. While I think that that is an excellent point, Cameron and Comfort were unable to answer Brian’s retort to that idea. Brian said, and I’m paraphrasing:

If god created everything, who created god? If you claim that everything has a creator, why do you repel that law in this one special, magical case? Who’s god’s creator? How can you make a rule, then say it doesn’t apply in the case that you choose for it not to. There is a law in science, the third law of thermodynamics, that says that matter can neither be created or destroyed. Isn’t it simpler to assume that the universe has always existed and that natural forces created everything, instead of making up a god because you don’t know where it comes from.

If you want to watch the video, it’s at Abcnews.com, but I don’t know how much longer it’ll be there. The part I’m paraphrasing above comes from the first section of the video entitled: “Is God a projection of your culture?” Ok, here’s how I would have responded to Brian’s argument. Again, I wasn’t in the moment, so this may be the product of hindsight:

Well Brian, I’m glad that you mention the third law of thermodynamics, which states that all the energy in the universe is moving toward a state of entropy, or low energy. I think that the law you are referring to is actually the first law which states that all the energy in the universe remains constant, even though it may change forms. In other words, the total amount of matter in the universe never changes.

I’ll get back to that statement in just a second. If I may return to the third law for a moment first, I think that it is actually at odds with the widely held view of macro evolution. If all forms of matter are moving from higher order to lower order, how is it possible for systems to move in the opposite direction? How may a single-celled organism evolve into something with multiple cells? How does new information get added to its DNA, when in nature we observe the exact opposite. Every time a cell is copied or reproduced the chances for genetic mutation, which has always been observed to be detrimental, is increased. There are no examples in nature of systems moving in the direction of higher order. Everything moves towards chaos.

Back to your point about the first law of thermodynamics, why is it unfair to say that everything needs a creator besides God? Inventing special cases is nothing new to science. Take spontaneous generation. No one today actually believes that organisms come into being out of thin air, but previous to the enlightenment, people believed that insects like flies spontaneously appeared. During the enlightenment tests were conducted that proved “spontaneous generation” to be false. If you look in any biology textbook, you’ll see that one of the first laws of biology is: “no living cell comes from anything but a living cell.” If you turn a few pages, you’ll see how science must repel this law in order for macro-evolution to take place. It is edited to read: “All cells, except for the very first living cell, come from living cells.” How is saying that everything has a creator, except for God himself, any different?

So, that’s what I would have said. More or less.