"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

J C

IrishKnight wrote: »

Well, they aren't transformed by design, it is just random chance. So in the example I gave, "nylonase" a non-funcational section of DNA in Flavobacterium sp. become functional due to a frame-shift mutation. That is to say, there was some deletion of base pairs which shifted the reading of DNA. This deletion happened to produce an enzyme which could "eat" a by-product on nylon, allowing Flavobacterium sp. to use this nylon by-product as food.

the pre-existing 'library' of functionalty is expressed by frame shifts ... amongst other mechanisms.

IrishKnight wrote: »

Just so I am clear, are you saying that humans are complex because they require less genes for life as those genes contain more information? I'm asking as I just want to be clear about what you are saying! Clarity is key as they say...

I am saying that Human Beings exhibit more complexity and functionality that any other individual creature ... yet their genome is remarkably compact (in comparison with a mouse or rice, for example) ... and thus the quality and density of information is greater in the Human Genome.

J C

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Its written in the bible.

... care to elaborate???

POINTBREAK

koth wrote: »

If you read Jammys link, you'd see it shows how your maths doesn't work.

My own post was highlighting how simple organisms/cells can mutate over time into more complex organisms.

your 'evidence' so far has been bad maths and opinion, in other words it's evidence in the loosest sense of the word.

-
Basic trigonometry has already been denied and Probability has been positively raped to "prove" JC's points. He clearly has no understanding of Maths. Its just another red herring thrown in to the discussion.

Zillah

No really, can we just ban that guy? Every post is nonsense. I don't mind crazy theists posting, but J C is in an entirely different league of pointlessness.

dead one

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I'd like to get an answer to this question, dead one.

You said earlier that the second law of thermodynamics disproves evolution, because the entropy of a closed system always increases (i.e. the entire universe.)

So, tell me: if you put some water into your freezer, leave it an hour and then take it out, what have you? You have ice. How? Shouldn't that be impossible?

Okay....the entropy of water increases when it melts......... and decreases when it freezes..... Right!!!! Entropy of something decreases...provided it increases in others..... This is how you have ice....You put water at 30 degrees into your 10 degree freezer. Heat flow from warm water to rest of freezer.... causing increase in overall entropy of freezer..... Right!!!.... When heat is added to something..... Entropy increases.... Similary there are lot of processes which are happening in the universe causing the increase in overall entropy of universe........ "Entropy always increases" is an rule of physics which is always true. It isn't difficult to see.... Second law of thermodynamic doesn't adds up anything to evolution.... So... evolution doesn't approve the Seoncd law because evolution ends towards more ordered and thus, lower entropy

King Mob

dead one wrote: »

Okay....the entropy of water increases when it melts......... and decreases when it freezes..... Right!!!! Entropy of something decreases...provided it increases in others..... This is how you have ice....You put water at 30 degrees into your 10 degree freezer. Heat flow from warm water to rest of freezer.... causing increase in overall entropy of freezer..... Right!!!.... When heat is added to something..... Entropy increases.... Similary there are lot of processes which are happening in the universe causing the increase in overall entropy of universe........ "Entropy always increases" is an rule of physics which is always true. It isn't difficult to see.... Second law of thermodynamic doesn't adds up anything to evolution.... So... evolution doesn't approve the Seoncd law because evolution ends towards more ordered and thus, lower entropy

Yes, for evolution to be true you'd need some sort of external power source for processes on Earth...
This source must be large enough to burn for billions of years...
And It would have to heat the entire Earth...
But something that big and hot would have to be far enough away so as not to burn everything.... Maybe around 90 million miles or so...

Mmmmh... I wonder...

J C

Zillah wrote: »

No really, can we just ban that guy? Every post is nonsense. I don't mind crazy theists posting, but J C is in an entirely different league of pointlessness.

"I don't like what he is saying ... so off with his head" ... the cry of every 'tin-pot' dictator down through history!!!

... and just out of interest ... what was 'pointless' about my posting on this thread ... please be specific ... and stand up your baseless allegation.

Please also stop the Ad Homonem remarks ... I don't call ye 'crazy atheists' ... because ye are clearly not crazy ... and neither am I or any other Theist that has posted on this thread!!!

MagicMarker

If JC is banned he'll just be back in 3 days anyway.

dead one

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, for evolution to be true you'd need some sort of external power source for processes on Earth...
This source must be large enough to burn for billions of years...
And It would have to heat the entire Earth...
But something that big and hot would have to be far enough away so as not to burn everything.... Maybe around 90 million miles or so...
Mmmmh... I wonder...

same old argument..... Now... tell what is that external source for universe...... to keep its processes living....

King Mob

dead one wrote: »

same old argument.....

There's a reason it's the "same old argument".
It's the right answer.

dead one wrote: »

Now... tell what is that external source for universe...... to keep its processes living....

It doesn't need one because the entropy of the universe on the whole is not decreasing .

Now just to make sure you actually know what you're talking about Dead One, what is the exact and mathematical definition of entropy?
We asked the same of JC but he was never able to provide an answer.

The Mad Hatter

dead one wrote: »

same old argument..... Now... tell what is that external source for universe...... to keep its processes living....

Evolution is not taking place throughout the whole universe.

dead one

King Mob wrote: »

It doesn't need one because the entropy of the universe on the whole is not decreasing .

[FONT=arial,helvetica][/FONT]if potential energy is added from outside of a system then entropy actually can decrease....... Is the sun's Energy Potential energy?.... The answer is no.......even if you add energy.....things simply don't get better on their own......Does input from sun create life in all its forms, and if so, how?.... Entropy is decay..... while evolution is improvement......

The Mad Hatter wrote:

Evolution is not taking place throughout the whole universe.

physic is taking place.........

King Mob

dead one wrote: »

if potential energy is added from outside of a system then entropy actually can decrease....... Is the sun's Energy Potential energy?.... The answer is no.......even if you add energy.....things simply don't get better on their own......

And again, the net entropy of the universe as a whole is not decreasing.

dead one wrote: »

Does input from sun create life in all its forms, and if so, how?....

The Sun drives most of the most basic physical processes on Earth.
Though the best theories also include geothermal energy.

dead one wrote: »

Entropy is decay..... while evolution is improvement......

And again, evolution is ultimately driven by outside energy. It's not a closed system.

Now I asked you for the specific and mathematical definition of entropy.
Can you actually give it or not?

dead one wrote: »

physic is taking place.........

You understand the definition of biology and physics, right?

mamolian

Wilful ignorance abounds.. If you are seriously interested in looking for evidence of evolution.. why not pick up any modern biology journal? Or perhaps buy one of Richard Dawkins books, "The Greatest Show on Earth" springs to mind.. It has many examples of observed evolution presented in a readable format for the imbeciles.

mamolian

dead one wrote: »

Now... tell what is that external source for universe...... to keep its processes living ....

"to keep its processes ... (working?)"

Gravity.

dead one

King Mob wrote: »

And again, the net entropy of the universe as a whole is not decreasing.

I ain't talking about universe.....I am talking about Earth...... It needs potential energy to decrease entropy and Sun's Energy isn't Potential Energy.... Right.....

King Mob wrote: »

The Sun drives most of the most basic physical processes on Earth.

Energy from the sun is in the form of electromagnetic energy..... It isn't potential Energy....... again it needs potential Energy to decrease entropy..... why you are ignoring it.........

King Mob wrote: »

Though the best theories also include geothermal energy.

Supporting theories with theories isn't evidence.... It is circular argument....

King Mob wrote: »

And again, evolution is ultimately driven by outside energy. It's not a closed system.

Where i said..... It is closed system...... again you are ignoring.... It needs potential Energy to decrease Entropy and you are directly relying Sun's Energy which isn't potential Energy..........as per physics...

King Mob wrote: »

Now I asked you for the specific and mathematical definition of entropy.
Can you actually give it or not?

Entropy represent quantitative measure of disorder in a system.....

dead one

mamolian wrote: »

Wilful ignorance abounds.. If you are seriously interested in looking for evidence of evolution.. why not pick up any modern biology journal? Or perhaps buy one of Richard Dawkins books, "The Greatest Show on Earth" springs to mind.. It has many examples of observed evolution presented in a readable format for the imbeciles.

What makes you to put faith in dawkin's book "The Greatest Show on Earth"..... is he faith free..... He supports theories that match with his faith....

dead one

mamolian wrote: »

"to keep its processes ... (working?)"

Gravity.

Is gravity compatible with evolution?....

King Mob

dead one wrote: »

I ain't talking about universe.....I am talking about Earth...... It needs potential energy to decrease entropy and Sun's Energy isn't Potential Energy.... Right.....

Energy from the sun is in the form of electromagnetic energy..... It isn't potential Energy....... again it needs potential Energy to decrease entropy..... why you are ignoring it.........

Where i said..... It is closed system...... again you are ignoring.... It needs potential Energy to decrease Entropy and you are directly relying Sun's Energy which isn't potential Energy..........as per physics...

I don't think you understand what potential energy actually is.

Electromagnetic energy gives things potential energy.

dead one wrote: »

Supporting theories with theories isn't evidence.... It is circular argument....

I am not supporting theories with theories, I am just clarify that in some cases there are other possible energy sources than the Sun

dead one wrote: »

Entropy represent quantitative measure of disorder in a system.....

Not quite, you'll have to be more exact I'm afraid.
And you've yet to give the precise mathematical definition.
Can you not do that?

Sam Vimes

dead one wrote: »

I ain't talking about universe.....I am talking about Earth...... It needs potential energy to decrease entropy and Sun's Energy isn't Potential Energy.... Right.....

edit: forget it. When someone goes from claiming that entropy should decrease because there is no external source of potential energy to, when he's proved wrong, asking if the raw energy from the sun can produce a solar powered home it becomes clear that rationality is out the window.

dead one

King Mob wrote: »

I don't think you understand what potential energy actually is.
Electromagnetic energy gives things potential energy.

See.... I understand what potential energy actually is..... but you aren't understanding..... Let see how you aren't understanding....in order to make biological systems grow, they need some mechanism to take the incoming energy and transform it into useful forms or potential energy....Simple examples for this are photosynthesis, digestion in animal.... Right!!!Energy itself could not create such systems..... ... That's what i am taking and you are skipping that part by saying....

King Mob wrote: »

Electromagnetic energy gives things potential energy.

You are indirectly saying sun's raw energy is all that is necessary to produce order from disorder.....Can Solar energy produce a simple solar-powered home? Then how it can produce such complex life...

King Mob wrote: »

I am not supporting theories with theories, I am just clarify that in some cases there are other possible energy sources than the Sun

Yes... you are..... You are indirectly saying Raw energy can create order from disorder....... The name of that mechanism which transforms raw energy into useful energy is God.....

King Mob wrote: »

Not quite, you'll have to be more exact I'm afraid.
And you've yet to give the precise mathematical definition.
Can you not do that?

Are you looking for that defintion which match with your hypothesis.... Then why you don't define in your own terms..

dead one

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Imagine this scenario please. The sun provides heat and light energy to plants which use it to grow. I then eat the plants and use the energy to push a boulder up a hill. The boulder then contains potential energy because of its position in a force field - it has the potential to roll down the hill

Now imagine this scenario please... The sun provides heat and light energy to plants which use it to grow....The plants need photosynthesis to convert sun's raw energy to make it useful........ then you eat the plant and your digestion system convert the energy of plant into usefull energy .....right...... Now point is there are abilities which are present in complicated life forms, and without them energy would be deadly....Right... Evolutionists say sun's raw energy provides all that is necessary to transform inorganic chemicals into a living cell and eventually into people......

sponsoredwalk

dead one wrote: »

Evolutionists say sun's raw energy provides all that is necessary to transform inorganic chemicals into a living cell and eventually into people......

You must be joking? Please quote one single evolutionisisisisisimist who
says anything like this.

King Mob

dead one wrote: »

See.... I understand what potential energy actually is..... but you aren't understanding..... Let see how you aren't understanding....in order to make biological systems grow, they need some mechanism to take the incoming energy and transform it into useful forms or potential energy....Simple examples for this are photosynthesis, digestion in animal.... Right!!!Energy itself could not create such systems..... ... That's what i am taking and you are skipping that part by saying....

You are indirectly saying sun's raw energy is all that is necessary to produce order from disorder.....Can Solar energy produce a simple solar-powered home? Then how it can produce such complex life...

So you're both using a strawman argument and moving the goalposts.

Tell me have you trained to use these dishonest tactics or do they just come naturally.

dead one wrote: »

Yes... you are..... You are indirectly saying Raw energy can create order from disorder....... The name of that mechanism which transforms raw energy into useful energy is God.....

Raw energy decreases entropy.

dead one wrote: »

Are you looking for that defintion which match with your hypothesis.... Then why you don't define in your own terms..

No, I'm looking for the actual definition that people who know what they are talking about use i.e. the mathematical definition.

So if you really understood entropy and how it works, you'd be to fire off this definition easily.
But you've avoided it 5 times now.
Could it be you haven't a clue what you're nattering on about?
Could it be you're just parroting what you've been told to by cranks?

Sam Vimes

dead one wrote: »

Now imagine this scenario please... The sun provides heat and light energy to plants which use it to grow....The plants need photosynthesis to convert sun's raw energy to make it useful........ then you eat the plant and your digestion system convert the energy of plant into usefull energy .....right...... Now point is there are abilities which are present in complicated life forms, and without them energy would be deadly....Right... Evolutionists say sun's raw energy provides all that is necessary to transform inorganic chemicals into a living cell and eventually into people......

See my edit. Bye now

dlofnep

dead one wrote: »

What makes you to put faith in dawkin's book "The Greatest Show on Earth"..... Was he faith free..... He supports theories that match with his faith....

Aside from the obvious semantics with your use of the word 'faith' - Of course he supports theories that he views as being the most scientifically valid. Who else's theories would he support, if not the ones he subscribes to? What an absurd comment.

dead one:

You really should drop the whole "2nd Law of Thermodynamics disproves evolution... Gotcha!" argument. It's been debunked time and time again. Most sensible creationists (what an oxymoron!) no longer use it.

It's a silly argument for one reason: Earth isn't a closed system. Entropy increases, on average, thoughout the universe over time. That doesn't mean it can't decrease in certain places: such as Earth, or your freezer when you put water in it.

If you're really interested in seeing why this is a ridiculous argument to use, I suggest reading the various FAQ located here.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

You are now entering the realm of philosophy ... and theology ... so perhaps it is understandable that you are 'out of your depth' somewhat on this issue ... but the answer to your conundrum is that any Creator of the Universe and everything therein must be transcendent (i.e. existing before it was created and outside of it). They must also be omnipotent and omniscient due to the immensity of the creative task and it's complexity and order. An omniscient and transcendent Creator doesn't require a Creator Himself ... He simply always was ... and always will be ... the great I AM of the Universe and beyond!!!!

How convenient for him that such a complex creator doesn't himself require creation. Creationism 101 - "All complex things require a creator... Except God of course.. he gets a free pass. Can't be having that."

J C wrote: »

Your obvious lack of knowledge of this important theological principle is another reason for a better education of every child, and some of the adults, in the beliefs of the main religions in our society.

I'm not sure if you're in any position to critique my knowledge on anything, or anyone else's for that matter.

J C wrote: »

All these evils are a result of the exercise of free will by Satan, Adam, Eve and their descendants. The Creation itself was perfect.

God creates mass poverty, disease, famine and war - all because someone ate an apple. What an admirable character.

J C wrote: »

I'm sorry that you feel that way ... but if you want your particular 'origins fables' taught to Christian children ... in all fairness, you, in turn, will have to allow the Christian 'origins story' to also be taught to your children ... it's called a quid pro quo.

You see - mine aren't fables. They are backed up by scientific evidence. Yours are fables because they are backed up by a 2000 year old back, that has very little support and absolutely no scientific merit.

J C wrote: »

In any event, a truly liberal education involves the child acquiring a knowledge of the beliefs of their own religion as well as those of other people in their community ... and not a one-sided, narrow-minded, brainwashing initiation into the 'origins story' of Atheism!!!

Haha, good one. Nobody is forced to subscribe to atheism - It is a lack of belief, and is something that most intelligent people will come to in their own time. Atheism is not taught as a subject. There is no class in school called 'Atheism studies'. There is a class however called 'Religious Studies' - Which is fine, but make it optional and don't force my child to learn it.

J C wrote: »

Why are ye so afraid of Creation Science and ID being taught to your childen

I'm not afraid of anything. There is no such thing as creation science, because creationism has no scientific merit.

J C wrote: »

... could it be that you know, deep down, that Atheism and its 'origins story' would be rejected by even a five year old ... if they knew about the truth that they were created?

No, deep down inside - I don't want my children to be intellectually challenged, and not part of some flat-earth society like you. The church at every step has objected to science. They locked up people who attempted to suggest that the Earth was not the centre of the universe. They teach children that if they do not accept Jesus as their saviour, that they will spend eternity in Hell.

Atheists make no such claims, nor do they hinder science. That is the difference.

Question time.

JC - How old is earth? How old is the universe? How old is the species of homo sapien? If you disagree with the theory of evolution - how do you explain the vast array of transitional forms, and the huge similarities in the genetic makeup of similar species?

kiffer

***Lurk mode off***

I can't decide who is more entertaining J C, or dead one...
I mean, J C has a certain charm but after so many years is... I don't know, a bit same old, same old.
dead one though is new and has the added advantage of a language barrier which can be used to generate all sorts of fun miscommunications.

I like the fall back to a misunderstanding of the entropy/enthalpy situation, but I think it's time for the creationists to branch out into "quantum something something"... Like the homeopaths and their ilk did...
It'll keep more of the scientificly lay creationist type people thinking that you're saying something sciency that they don't understand, so they can justify ignoring the responces to your nonsense...


Over all the thread has been fairly entertaining over the last few weeks...
J C seems to have reduced emoticon usage though.
Bad form.

Morbert

dead one wrote: »

See.... I understand what potential energy actually is..... but you aren't understanding..... Let see how you aren't understanding....in order to make biological systems grow, they need some mechanism to take the incoming energy and transform it into useful forms or potential energy....Simple examples for this are photosynthesis, digestion in animal.... Right!!!Energy itself could not create such systems..... ... That's what i am taking and you are skipping that part by saying....

You are indirectly saying sun's raw energy is all that is necessary to produce order from disorder.....Can Solar energy produce a simple solar-powered home? Then how it can produce such complex life...

Yes... you are..... You are indirectly saying Raw energy can create order from disorder....... The name of that mechanism which transforms raw energy into useful energy is God.....

Are you looking for that defintion which match with your hypothesis.... Then why you don't define in your own terms..

You are butchering statistical mechanics. The laws of physics tell us that plants need energy in low-entropy form. The photons emitted by the sun have low entropy. These are absorbed by life, and the energy is re-emitted as high-entropy, infra-red photons. The self-organising properties of life, in other words, are made possible by the energy of the sun.