Posted on 01/28/2005 4:28:41 PM PST by metacognative
BWAHAHAHAHA! Maybe you should check a post-1920 thermo book out of the library, ma'am. The third law has been around for the best part of a century, and there are those who take considerable stock in the zeroth law.
Oddly, each of them is a recognizable species in itself, which belies their intermediacy.
This is just so stupid. What organism, on earth now, isn't a member of a species? They all are, because we classified them all. You think that because we gave it the name Archaeopteryx lithographica, it magically ceased being an intermediate form?
Yes, the speed of light is an issue, maybe I'll come around to that too.
Well, it'll be you against Einstein. I breathlessly await the clash of the Titans.
Does the Second Law apply to open systems?
Does the Second Law tell about the direction of processes?
Does the availabiltiy of energy ensure that order can increase within an open system?
Give me an example of something you can't classify.
Evolution's model would yield a mushy data set of animals that could only be called lifeforms, never even cats and dogs or animals and plants.
Why? Prove it.
Every archaeopteryx is an archaeopteryx, not something else.
So you think that if you name something, it removes the potential for it having a basic biological role?
1) Evolution is "JUST" a theory (implying that it has no scientific backing)
You never heard that from me. I think evolution has abundant scientific backing. I am an evolutionist, on scientific and personal experience/observational grounds.
2) The Second Law of Thermodynamics makes evolution impossible. (along with all their fake science distortions of entropy.)
Au contraire, mon chere — but according to new sources I’ve read, thermodynamic entropy and information in living systems are directly, synergistically, and thus most intimately correlated terms.
3) Schools teach evolution as fact, not theory.
Schools (it seems to me) teach whatever is “politically correct.” Schools ought not to be ideologically driven; but there you are. You can’t even blame the local school board for this state of affairs. It is the parents who are generally derelict in their duty here.
4) Man descended from the ape.
But what would be the meaning of such “descent,” assuming it happened in the first place? How definite are species categories anyway? Are they exact, or merely descriptive of general tendencies? Is all of Nature really driven by the urge to reproduce such that Nature puts all her resources into this direction alone? Does anyone think that this is what Darwin really meant to suggest?
5) There is no fossil evidence of evolution.
Well, how could there be? Fossils don’t “last forever.” With fossils, it’s always a case of “catch as catch can.” You never see what you never found. But according to the theorists, evolution does last forever. So it seems we need to be looking for a kind of “forever-qualified” evidence, rather than this fleeting, temporal, fragile stuff like fossils, skeletons, etc., in order to place Darwinism on a firm footing.
6) It is impossible for the Colorado River to have carved the Grand Canyon.
Oh? Why is that? Nature has her way with material things in the long run, and has a certain way of going about it. This is what makes Nature "observable" in the first place.
7) There is no evidence that the humans existed prior to 6000 years ago.
Well, of course there is. Have you never heard of the Caves at Lascaux, in the French-Spanish Pyranees? They are said to be a human community habitation dating back some 40,000 years…. Lots of "art" -- i.e, paintings of natural figures -- on the walls....
8) Radiometric dating is a false science used by evolutionists.
I doubt that statement in general. But then everybody needs to get his instrument calibrated right, from time to time. :^)
9) Genesis is true therefore evolution is false (no, we will never get by this one).
Genesis is true, and Darwinian evolution also is true as far as it goes. But it does not go everywhere. It leaves out the origin of life, and life’s manner of transmission into material forms. Seems that’s a whole lot to be left out, assuming we want to know the truth about life in the first place.
10) All non-Christians are doomed to hell.
I’ve heard some Christians say this. I’ve also heard Muslims say similar things about their non-coreligionists. Etc. Another story for another time. Point for now is, this Christian doesn’t say such a thing. And wouldn’t.
11) Enough for now.
Amen! And Praise the Lord! And may He bless you extravagantly, dear Wild Turkey.
Of course.
Does the Second Law tell about the direction of processes?
Of course.
Does the availabiltiy of energy ensure that order can increase within an open system?
What kind of energy? Heat emitted at a high temperature? If you knew any thermo. at all, you'd know that mere energy means nothing in the context of the second law. Try G or A.
The first thing you need to understand is that you have to be able to read to post here. You can't sign up without seeing the rules.
The most important rule is that when banned you don't sign up under a different name. Most first offenders are reinstated after a few days. If not, you email the management and ask for a second chance.
Google (or the library) is your friend. It's not a secret.
Seriously: if you want to learn thermo., take a college degree in Chemistry or Physics. We spend a semester teaching Chem. Engineering students about thermo.; they're by-and-large the smartest kids in the university (and don't they know it) and they've had a lot of background, including 3-4 semesters of calculus. You can't pick up what you need froma biblical tract.
Answers: No and No. But I do not see how these questions pertain to the case at hand....
...just to answer two points you raise for now, Ichneumenon. I'll have to look at the rest tomorrow, for now it's time for me to go to bed. Got another workday tomorrow, ya know.
Goodnight!
About as smarmy a piece of writing as I've seen in a while. Congrats, BB. Are you a lawyer?
Sez who?
They don't teach calculus adequately in high school. I doubt you got more than one, anyway.
He listed all 3 laws of thermodynamics.
Don't you think you look rather silly posting categorical statements about thermodynamics without knowing that the third law even existed? Don't you think you should acquire some modicum of knowledge before making universal claims about a field whose basics you aren't even aware of?
Gould isn't God; and besides, I'd rather read his own words.
A lot of the classifications in biology are anthropogenic. Observers want to put animals into categories, and sometimes they force them. I don't know where you live, but if you live anywhere but the Northeast, look at the juncos outside your window. How many species are there?
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.