Only one day of six, actually. Yet, a different day than this one, a venomous, furred,
electro-receptor system equipped, egg-laying mammal.
A testament to both the efficiency and sense of humor of the designer . . .
Posted on 08/16/2004 9:40:47 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Samuel Chen was a high school sophomore who believed in freedom of speech and the unfettered pursuit of knowledge. He thought his public high school did, too, but when it came to the subject of evolution -- well, now he's not so sure.
In October 2002, Chen began working to get Dr. Michael Behe, professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University, to give a lecture at Emmaus High School in Emmaus, Pennsylvania.
Chen, who was co-chair of a student group that tries to stress the importance of objectivity on controversial issues, knew that Behe would be perfect, since the group was examining evolution as a topic. The author of Darwin's Black Box, a critique of the foundational underpinnings of evolution, Behe had presented his work and debated the subject in universities in the U.S. and England.
Behe agreed to come in February 2004 and give an after-school lecture entitled, "Evolution: Truth or Myth?" As the school year drew to a close in 2003, Chen had all the preliminaries nailed down: he had secured Behe's commitment, received approval from school officials, and reserved the school auditorium.
Then he found out just how entrenched Darwinist orthodoxy was in the science department at Emmaus. By the following August, Chen had entered into a six-month battle to preserve the Behe lecture.
As the struggle unfolded, it became obvious that those who opposed Behe coming to Emmaus didn't seem to care about his credentials. In addition to publishing over 35 articles in refereed biochemical journals, Darwin's Black Box was internationally reviewed in over 100 publications and named by National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century.
Instead, it was Behe's rejection of Darwinism -- in favor of what is called "intelligent design" -- that drove opposition. According to the Discovery Institute, of which Behe is a fellow, this theory holds "that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."
The head of the science department, John Hnatow, sent a statement to every faculty member in the school stressing that Emmaus held to the official policy of the National Science Teachers Association. That policy states: "There is no longer a debate among scientists about whether evolution has taken place."
It appeared there would be no debate at Emmaus, either. Some of the science teachers would not even allow Chen to address their classes and explain to students what Behe's lecture would be about.
Chen said various tactics were apparently used to undercut the event, including an attempt to cancel the lecture and fold the student organization without the knowledge of Chen and other members; requiring that the necessary funds for the lecture be raised much faster than for other student events; and moving the lecture from the auditorium to the school cafeteria.
One science teacher in particular, Carl Smartschan, seemed particularly riled about the upcoming lecture. Smartschan took it upon himself to talk to every teacher in the science department, insisting that intelligent design was "unscientific" and "scary stuff." He asked the principal to cancel the lecture, and then, when the principal refused, asked the faculty advisor for the student group to halt the lecture. Smartschan even approached Chen and demanded that the student organization pay to have an evolutionist come to lecture later in the year.
Smartschan's campaign to get the Behe lecture canceled was surprising to Chen because the event was scheduled after school, and not during class time, and was sponsored by a student group, not the school itself. Nevertheless, Chen persevered. The lecture was a success, attracting more than 500 people.
In the process, however, Chen's struggle took its toll. His health deteriorated over the course of the controversy, to the point where he collapsed three times in one month, including once at school. "My health has been totally junked," he told AFA Journal.
Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney and senior policy advisor for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, is advising Chen on his options for the coming year. Fahling said, "Schools are not allowed to interfere with viewpoints with which they disagree, and schools cannot disrupt the right of the students to participate in the academic and intellectual life."
Despite the hardship, Chen said he would do it all over again because the issue is so important. "I feel that there's a dictatorship on academic freedom in our public schools now," he said, adding, "I refer to evolution education as a tyranny .... You can't challenge it in our schools. Kids have been thrown out of class for challenging it."
That tyranny can be intimidating to students. "Some of the students who support me are afraid to speak out, especially because they saw how the science department reacted," Chen said. "They have a fear of speaking out against it in their classes."
On the other hand, he added that some students "are now questioning evolution, some for the first time."
That may be the first step in the overthrow of Darwin's dictatorship.
The Second Law applies only when we consider a system and its surroundings together. The entropy of a system can spontaneously increase, decrease or remain the same. The Second Law states that the entropy of system plus surroundings must increase.
Your main gripe with me is because I apply the Second Law to an open system. Is this correct?
No, my gripe with you is that you considered a system of any sort, without considering the surroundings. I don't know how many times I need to state this to get it through, but the Second Law does not prevent the entropy of a system from decreasing, except in the limited case of an adiabatic system.
I don't have time for this.
What is the "no effect other" mean? What does this imply about thermodynamic systems and the direction of processes?
'No effect other' means what it says. A refigerator produces far more heat than it extracts from its interior. The extra heat is an effect. The Second Law says you can decrease the entropy of a system as long as you increase the entropy elsewhere by a greater amount. When radiation from the sun, at 10,000 K, is channeled through living organisms and eventually reradiated by the earth into space, at around 300K, there is an enormous increase in entropy. That increase far overwhelms the tiny decrease in entropy resulting from living processes, inclusing evolution.
Are you saying that the air can spontaneously cool away from equilibrium based purely on the environment. This would seem to violate the Clausius statement of the Second Law.
2nd placemarker of Thermodynamics
I'm not sure what this is intended to mean, but have you heard of radiative cooling?
The irony with which you quote Christ is duly noted . . .
I think you missed my point.
Only one day of six, actually. Yet, a different day than this one, a venomous, furred,
electro-receptor system equipped, egg-laying mammal.
A testament to both the efficiency and sense of humor of the designer . . .
The gene is non-functional. The defect is exactly the same in humans, chimps and gorillas (but not in other mammals).
Far from torturing the data to fit the model, this observation is very easily and neatly explained by evolution: the mutation occurred in a common ancestor of these primates. (BTW, Vitamin C/L-GLO is one of hundreds of such examples).
The original topic of this thread is about what we are going to teach children in science class. This means if you or Behe or Dembski or whoever have a problem with teaching evolution, you are all going to have to come up with something else tangible for high school students.
Every spacecraft I have ever worked with uses this. :-)
Placemarker
Are you saying that the air can spontaneously cool away from equilibrium based purely on the environment?
And you replied:
I'm not sure what this is intended to mean, but have you heard of radiative cooling?
You are playing a game of obfuscation, like many evolutionists, concerning the 2nd Law problem with evolution. Spontaneous processes, such as radiative cooling, are not the issue! Certainly, heat from a hotter surface is radiated to a colder surface. This is expected -- a spontaneous process! The issue we are talking about are cases similar to the Clausius statement where heat is transfered from the colder reservoir to the hotter reservoir -- a nonspontaneous process!
What is your definition of spontaneous, RWP?
Spontaneously organized placemarker.
Example: freezing of water at -2 C is spontaneous. Melting of ice at - 2 C is not spontaneous.
Well, that definition is equivalent to "what happens, happens". The dictionary defintion of spontaneous includes "Happening or arising without apparent external cause; self-generated. ". Now what happens to the surroundings of a closed system due to the events within the closed system? Nothing. It is a closed system.
Thermodynamics uses a specific technical definition of 'spontaneous' which is not the same as the conventional definition. If you want to discuss thermo., learn the jargon.
Now what happens to the surroundings of a closed system due to the events within the closed system? Nothing. It is a closed system.
Heat can leave a closed system. What you apparently mean is an adiabatic system. Once again, if you want to discuss thermo., learn the jargon.
Well, if I apparently mean that, answer the question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.