Posted on 01/28/2005 4:28:41 PM PST by metacognative
You have again confused the second law with one of Newton's laws, in this case the law of universal gravitation. The second law says nothing about the direction of motion of the albatross.
Showing "elements of design" is not design. A regular pattern occuring in random processes is not design. It is a regular -- symetric or spiral, and such -- pattern. It is a pattern.
What makes it "design" to you?
Fine, it is a pattern. Define the difference between a pattern and a design.
What makes it "design" to you?
You're the one pressing the "intelligent design" idea. You tell me, how do you define "design"? What part of the universe exhibits signs of design? What are the designs? How have you eliminated the possibility that they were created without an intelligence's participation?
That is analogous to the fact that it is exceedingly improbable that you and I are here in this world today by random processes, and the observed fossil evidence, chemistry and known physics says that too. Of course, one may "believe" (btw "belief" is something I avoid) that mere possibility, not matter how exceeedingly unlikely is preferable to acceptance of an Intelligent Designer, but to accept such an exceedingly exceeedingly low probability chance I find, well, irrational.
The probability of 2 ounces of sodium chloride forming a three dimensional crystal with exact alternation of sodium and chloride ions is 1 in 2(6.022*1023), which is overwhelmingly more improbable than your 50 heads (1 in 250)
Further, it is a false choice to say that the choice is between blind chance and a God pulling the strings. There are many shades of possibility, not only between these poles, but outside of them, as well.
Finally, while the "fossil evidence, chemestry and known physics" make it improbable that we are here by random processes, no one, to my knowledge, is proposing that strictly random processes are responsible for use being here.
Lastly, you claim that "belief" is something that you avoid, yet you profess belief in an entity you cannot see, test or know and for which there is no objective evidence. Indeed, you do not use the entire word "God", presumably to avoid the defacement of the name of this entity. That's beyond belief. That's faith, and I don't think there is anything wrong it, but don't kid yourself that you are a rationalist, and your belief in the supernatural theory of ID is based on logic and reason.
But you have admitted that the 50-head toss is just as probable as anyother sequence so it is no more improbable than any other sequence.
I was talking coins -- individually coins are both observed and designed to fall on either side in equal probability.
Yet here we are alive in this world and the summing product of all the probabilites of that being so from all the individual physical, chemical and biological systems we closely observe is effectively zilch. Only the fact that we are, it all is about us just so allows us to even entertain the notion that it ever could be so.
No 'if' about it. It's the probability we use to calculate the entropy. Clearly, according to your logic, every single salt crystal in the world has been individually designed.
If it is cold enough to solidfy the Cl, and you make a dust of the solid phase Cl and Na so fine it is one atom grains and then mixed the Na and Cl together and magically came up with a salt cube of 1 gram, gee willikers your probability would be correct. That's ignoring van der walls and non-ionic bondings which I'm not running over to a chemistry book to look up. Is there a single atom Cl, or single atom Na in a solid dust form? That sounds strange. Maybe in a mass spectrometer, "vapor" deposition or something like that. But then the "intelligent designer" is very much in play -- that being the physical chemist and his toys.
As to the relation to entropy, you'll have to explain that more carefully in a bit more detail, I don't quite catch it.
What a beautiful design!
The relationship between entropy and probability is S=k ln W (Boltzmann's equation). W is the number of possibilities; in the case of your coin, W = 250
Much of science is inference of stuff you can not see or test directly. We infer from observations, for example using probability analysis. You have a "belief" that G-d is impossible to even logically infer from observation. That belief has NO support.
The chemisty -- the ionic attraction -- reduces the number of available states, or rather makes some states more likely then others. The effect is to greatly reduce W or what would simply in some entropy model to W. Again, I'm assuming you are talking about the crystal being formed out of aqueous solution.
simply -> simplify
But when you don't understand what you are talking about, your "indirect" testing is worthless. And when there is a non-zero chance of something naturally occurring, that result does not require a supernatural explanation, by definition.
But what I find interesting is that you can not only "infer" the existence of this God, but his identity as well. Or else why the coy "G-d" stuff. Does Hercules care if you deface his name? Would Shiva give a damn if his name were erased? Or is it only Yahweh who can make a coin land on heads fifty times. So, you clearly believe that you know about not only God's existence, but his nature, as well. Tell me, exactly what is the scientific basis for your ideas about the nature and identity of God?
You have a "belief" that G-d is impossible to even logically infer from observation. That belief has NO support.
I believe that you cannot prove God's existence. You can infer whatever you want. That doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct, though.
Of course, that misses a predicate. The predicate is "Why bother?" -- to state in its Eeyore form.
Why do people even care what is proved or not? Why bother?
The answer is we do care. And where does that sense of caring come from? What does man's very being infer?
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.