Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Read more

“Move into the light.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#110089 Mar 19, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun won’t make you more complex—the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy. If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sun’s undirected energy will cause mutations.(Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information). Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.
So is your degree is micro or astro biology?
I think it's in fundiedenialbiology.

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#110090 Mar 19, 2014
With one click of a button...

SENT:

“I be me, and you are...”

Level 6

Since: Dec 06

in a city...

#110091 Mar 19, 2014
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Is there any other?
; )
As long as he knew what I was thinking...

MAYBE????

Smart to Opinions how to place them well and on what...

Damns hope that made his day!!!
THE LONE WORKER

Bowling Green, KY

#110092 Mar 20, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am saying that you don't understand the basic concepts.
Entropy is only very generally a measure of randomness. i tis more accurately a measure of the usable energy of a system. The second law says that entropy will always increase in an isolated system. It is quite possible, even common, for the degree of order in a system to go up *and* the entropy to also go up.
A very specific example is given by looking at a mixture of oil and water. The mixture is more 'random', but it will spontaneously change into the more 'ordered' system where the oil and water are separated. Furthermore, this is actually driven by entropy effects.
But, for non-isolated systems (like the Earth), the possibilities are much broader. In particular, if energy is put into the system (like the energy from the sun), it is quite possible for their to be parts of the system where entropy decreases, sometimes dramatically.
In the specific case of evolution, the very slight increase of 'order' in living things is offset by a very large amount of heat (disorder) produced as waste. The total leaves an total increase of entropy.
OK, this increase of entropy as you call it, is in reality a dis order or decrease in the way it was in the beginning. The beginning must have been an ordered arrangement which began at once. The Bible claims that the first event was light and Jesus said it began very very small and then branched out when he was explaining what this was likened too. This miracle happened by the power which was to create and all things came quickly at the command of the Creator. How far and how fast could the original light have traveled and what were it's limits? Man can not imagine this to have happened and so they make jokes about a magical poofing or popping into existence because of ignorance.
Unbelievable

United States

#110093 Mar 20, 2014
Ya just gotta love the fundies. First they say that science is evil. Now days, they're trying to use it to prove the existence of god. Their problem is however, that the more that science understands the universe, the more the case is made against there being one. Watching religion change it's beliefs throughout the years has been quite amusing to say the least.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#110094 Mar 20, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun won’t make you more complex—the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy. If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sun’s undirected energy will cause mutations.(Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information). Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.
And you are simply wrong on several points.

First, the argument was from the second law of thermodynamics. The form for that law is quite different in an open system than for an isolated system.

Second, the second law doesn't say what does happen, merely what cannot happen. It isn't actually a very tight constraint. In the case of the Earth, the energy from the sun is enough to make the second law say that large changes are allowed.

Third, whether the energy is 'directed' or not is irrelevant to the physics of the second law. There are many times when 'undirected' heat induces the chemical reactions that we want: cooking is a good example.

Fourth, in the particular case of abiogenesis, the radiation from the sun actually does induce exactly the types of reactions that are required for the development of life. Sometimes chemical bonds need to be broken in order for other ones to form. The radiation from the sun helps that process.

Fifth, even this has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution is concerned with how species change over time, not how life got started. or cosmology.

Sixth, there are many types of mutations other than simple copy errors. Duplications, for example. These *do* increase information.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#110095 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>OK, this increase of entropy as you call it, is in reality a dis order or decrease in the way it was in the beginning.
No, like I said, entropy and disorder are NOT the same thing. They are somewhat related, but they differ in some very important cases. The second law deals with *entropy*, not disorder.
The beginning must have been an ordered arrangement which began at once.
Why? Supply the math and physics for this claim. The netropy must be lower in the past, I will readily agree with that. The notion of 'order' is vague enough to not be very useful.
The Bible claims that the first event was light and Jesus said it began very very small and then branched out when he was explaining what this was likened too. This miracle happened by the power which was to create and all things came quickly at the command of the Creator. How far and how fast could the original light have traveled and what were it's limits? Man can not imagine this to have happened and so they make jokes about a magical poofing or popping into existence because of ignorance.
I already know what your book of myths says. Reality says something different. The earth is much, much older than a mere 6000 years. There was no 'center' of creation from which everything was emitted. And we *do* see remnants of the energy released from the Big Bang. It is called the cosmic background radiation and is a wealth of information about the early universe. And the speed of light is about 186,000 miles per second.
THE LONE WORKER

Bowling Green, KY

#110096 Mar 20, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, like I said, entropy and disorder are NOT the same thing. They are somewhat related, but they differ in some very important cases. The second law deals with *entropy*, not disorder.
<quoted text>
Why? Supply the math and physics for this claim. The netropy must be lower in the past, I will readily agree with that. The notion of 'order' is vague enough to not be very useful.
<quoted text>
I already know what your book of myths says. Reality says something different. The earth is much, much older than a mere 6000 years. There was no 'center' of creation from which everything was emitted. And we *do* see remnants of the energy released from the Big Bang. It is called the cosmic background radiation and is a wealth of information about the early universe. And the speed of light is about 186,000 miles per second.
Well then, you know what the Bible has always said. the Bible also speaks of patterns when God makes things, so if we were to somehow come to an understanding of how all nature works according to a pattern, then we may begin to understand all of nature more precisely. Light is a form which branches out in some instances just as Jesus taught when he likened the heavens and the earth to a tree. The Bible claims it happened at the Word of God and his Word is likened to a seed. This is what the Bible has always said and it has not changed.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#110097 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Well then, you know what the Bible has always said. the Bible also speaks of patterns when God makes things, so if we were to somehow come to an understanding of how all nature works according to a pattern, then we may begin to understand all of nature more precisely. Light is a form which branches out in some instances just as Jesus taught when he likened the heavens and the earth to a tree. The Bible claims it happened at the Word of God and his Word is likened to a seed. This is what the Bible has always said and it has not changed.
So you criticized people for not knowing physics and you know none yourself. I really could not care less what your book of myths says if it differs from reality. Making an analogy of light to a tree is simply silly. even with 'branching out'(!!?!).
THE LONE WORKER

Bowling Green, KY

#110098 Mar 20, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you criticized people for not knowing physics and you know none yourself. I really could not care less what your book of myths says if it differs from reality. Making an analogy of light to a tree is simply silly. even with 'branching out'(!!?!).
In the beginning what was the first thing that God said for there to be? The creation happened at once in my view. All the elements and matter were in an ordered state from the beginning when God created the heaven and the earth and it did not take billions of years for him to do it.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#110099 Mar 20, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun won’t make you more complex—the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy. If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sun’s undirected energy will cause mutations.(Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information). Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.
Photosynthesis.

Done.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#110100 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>In the beginning what was the first thing that God said for there to be? The creation happened at once in my view. All the elements and matter were in an ordered state from the beginning when God created the heaven and the earth and it did not take billions of years for him to do it.
Yeah, it did. No matter how or who started it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#110101 Mar 20, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
A fairly large input of energy and a large release of heat and waste gas. The second law allows for increased complexity if it is balanced off by corresponding increases of disorder (usually in the form of heat, but expanding gas also works).
Again, you are misunderstanding the basics of the second law. Probably that is because you are only reading popular accounts or even creationist accounts. I would suggest learning some actual physics and seeing what is really going on. You will find out that the popular accounts leave a LOT out. To some extent, they have to. But probably not as much as they do.
Not that your input is unappreciated but my post was sarcasm for SevenTee's sake.

;-p
THE LONE WORKER

Bowling Green, KY

#110102 Mar 20, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, it did. No matter how or who started it.
Your source book may change though, mine never will.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#110103 Mar 20, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots, try installing a wordprocessor, mine has 15 different versions of English from A to Z (Australian to Zimbabwean)
I have dyslexia and so copy and paste from topix into my WP so that I can read it. Being British the WP is set to English (British) so words spelt with ize rather than ise always flag up and an error, which was confusing for a while, now I just think ha! must be American spelling
Sorry Christine, understood, that was a sarcastic jab at ignorant, culturally anemic folks who think the world speaks (or should at least) North American English. And at the same time poking fun at British English, with your lorries and trowsers and colour and such. Hence the wink ; )

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#110104 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Your source book may change though, mine never will.
Yup.

Your 'source book' will always be incorrect from a scientific and historical point of view, if that book is to be interpreted literally.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#110105 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Well then, you know what the Bible has always said. the Bible also speaks of patterns when God makes things, so if we were to somehow come to an understanding of how all nature works according to a pattern, then we may begin to understand all of nature more precisely. Light is a form which branches out in some instances just as Jesus taught when he likened the heavens and the earth to a tree. The Bible claims it happened at the Word of God and his Word is likened to a seed. This is what the Bible has always said and it has not changed.
Light does not "branch out" Lone, it spreads like waves. In simpler terms compare it to the waves spreading outward by dropping a stone into a pool. Not comparable to a tree. Had you said lightNING, you would have at least had an argument, but still, no comparison. Lightning zigzags and branches out finding the paths of least resistance (lightning in a vacuum would travel in a straight line), unlike a tree reaching up towards light, spreading its branches to create the largest surface area possible for survival.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#110106 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>In the beginning what was the first thing that God said for there to be? The creation happened at once in my view. All the elements and matter were in an ordered state from the beginning when God created the heaven and the earth and it did not take billions of years for him to do it.
Once again, I know what your book of myths says. I also understand your misinterpretation of it and of the science. So, really, without actual evidence, your view is irrelevant.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#110107 Mar 20, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things.
How do you know? In order for you to know this you must know what CSI (Complex Specified Information) is and how to quantify it. Therefore you must be able to:

1 - Explain how exactly CSI can be measured accurately and objectively.

2 - Point out the demarcation line between "designed" and "non-designed" on your CSI measuring scale, so we can see what energy can do on its own and at what point it needs a little "extra help".

3 - How that demarcation line was determined in an objective manner via the scientific method.
SevenTee wrote:
Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun won’t make you more complex—the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy.
Does it not?

In that case turn the sun into a black hole and see how long you live for.
SevenTee wrote:
If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sun’s undirected energy will cause mutations.
Yes, you will get skin cancer if you leave yourself exposed too much. However despite this sunlight is still ESSENTIAL for life.
SevenTee wrote:
(Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information).
This is wrong. Now in the case of skin cancer it's true that the human body can't handle it, but that's due to the RATE of mutations being higher than we can deal with. Suntan for example is exactly the same, but at a rate we CAN handle.

Also mutations do NOT nearly always lose information. If they did then we wouldn't have lasted for millions of years like we have. The reason? EVERYONE is born with around 125 to 175 mutations. The effects can be beneficial or detrimental, but mostly they are neutral and we suffer no ill effects. Mutations can either take bases away, change existing ones, or even ADD bases to our genome. This is NEW genetic information by definition.

Unfortunately it seems you're getting your info from creationists. They are liars for Jesus. This explains why you are wrong.

If your presumptions about thermodynamics were correct, your body could never develop from a single-celled zygote to the presumably adult form it's in now. This has already been explained to you more than once so you still have to explain this rather large contradiction in your own position.
SevenTee wrote:
Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.
Another mistake you guys make so very often is pretend that the theory of evolution relies on abiogenesis (the origin of life). It does not. Evolution doesn't care HOW life started. Aliens, God, natural chemical processes, or something else we haven't even thought of yet. Doesn't matter. All it needs is for life to be here.

Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts. In order to demonstrate otherwise you need to demonstrate that life is in fact NOT here.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#110108 Mar 20, 2014
THE LONE WORKER wrote:
<quoted text>Your source book may change though, mine never will.
Wrong yet again. Our source book is the real world: using actual evidence to help us figure out what is going on. Yours is a 2000 year old book of myths which is re-interpreted every time someone realizes how wrong it is.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Let's Play Songs Titled with Two Words ... 17 min I Am No One_ 602
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 18 min wichita-rick 159,855
I'd rather... (Oct '11) 28 min SLY WEST 1,844
The Yes/No Game (May '11) 35 min Proud To Be Trina 7,952
News Oregon farmers agree slugs are a problem _ but ... 45 min Spotted Girl 25
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) 46 min Camilla 1,210
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 58 min Doug77 31,178
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 1 hr Shaddup 39,979
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 3 hr Doug77 28,153
Word Association (Jun '10) 3 hr say it aint so 26,952
Poll Can single Men be friends with Married Women? (Jun '12) 7 hr John Boner 169
More from around the web