Evolution or creation? (page 10)

pomegranate

No, I'm not blind. Neither of the doctors quoted say anything to support your claim that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. That's what I posted about.

Well, if your not blind, you certainly do not know how to read. Let me make it easy for you, at the end of Dr. Yu's statement he makes this point:

"Bear in mind that all these have to go against the second law of thermodynamics, law of irreducible complexity,"

Hint: Go against means violates.

It's not there. It's a page about thermodynamics and the misconception that the Second Law is somehow violated by evolution. I wasn't talking about cells at all. One step at a time

Well, let's go back to the first step as I brought up first before YOU, the cell. Show me your hypothesis.

So no energy goes in or out? Do you understand what I mean by a closed system? I mean, we're discussing energy transfer. Do you have any knowledge of this subject at all? You expect people to either provide you with a complete account of every detail of cellular evolution, when you don't even understand the most basic science. But you've apparently decided to believe what you already believe, regardless of what the facts are. Good look with your PhD.!

Instead of jerking around on the matter of thermodynamics (of which I have my own thoughts on the matter), just show me your thoughts on the cell and it's developement. Or are you thoughtless on the matter?

As far as me not having a basic understanding of science, that is obviously unfounded. If you knew me, you would know I have a fairly sound understanding of science. I am self employed and one facet of my business is around chemistry ie, electroplating, water purification, waste water treatment and other related and unrelated things.

Thanks for the luck.

PS. It was asked what the purpose was with all the God believing scientists I listed out so nicely. Well, it counters your point, which is, if you (pomegranate) don't understand evolution, you're stupid and don't understand science. Well, every single one of those scientists that established their respective disciplines didn't understand evolution either. In so many words, you call them stupid and not understanding science too. Which is obviously untrue.

pomegranate

Pom, do you believe that God could create through evolutionary processes if He so decided?

Yes.

pomegranate

I have some friends, my former workmates, who are still working at NASAs Space Physics Analysis Lab, and I was wondering if it would be OK with you if I forwarded your paper to some of them for their enlightenment.
I myself havent worked at in lab in several years so these new corrections that you will provide wont affect me too much, but these poor ignorant souls at the lab need to be corrected. You see for them, the proper understanding of physics, well, thats their bread and butter so they really need to know these new facts.
Do let us know when your paper is ready and I will be sure to pass it on.
Thanks
Freeman (waiting to be reeducated on thermodynamics)

Since this is obvious sarcasm, I'll pass.

Crazy151drinker

I have to agree with Prom.

I have all the answers, and I would love to share them with you (esp Jan H), but there is a lot of material I would have to mail you. To cover the costs of mailing, please send me $250 plus $9.95 S+H (non-refundible) along with your SSN, Mothers Maiden Name, and your DOB, and I will ship the answers to you ASAP.

crazy of the drinking to much bacardi class

rem

Pomegranate,

I feel like I'm getting dumber just talking to you:

No, I'm not blind. Neither of the doctors quoted say anything to support your claim that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. That's what I posted about.
Well, if your not blind, you certainly do not know how to read. Let me make it easy for you, at the end of Dr. Yu's statement he makes this point:
"Bear in mind that all these have to go against the second law of thermodynamics, law of irreducible complexity,"
Hint: Go against means violates.

You misunderstand (as per usual). Simply stating an opinion ("...these have to go against the second law of thermodynamics..") is not supporting a claim. The surgeon gave no evidence that it does indeed violate the Second Law of Thermodynamcis. He simply stated his uninformed opinion. Can you provide a cite where he explains exactly how the second law of thermodynamics is violated? I thought not.

It's like a doctor saying the Earth is flat... see it's proven... the Earth is flat - a doctor said so! He should know, right? He's a doctor!

I'm not sure why you are taking the words of a surgeon as gospel when it comes to physics and Evolution. Do you go to a plumber when you have a medical problem too?

rem

Edited by - rem on 11 October 2002 13:34:2

pomegranate

Can you provide a cite where he explains exactly how the second law of thermodynamics is violated? I thought not

Gee, Thanks for answering for me.

Since the important macromolecules of living systems (DNA, protein, etc.) are more energy rich than their precursors (amino acids, heterocyclic bases, phosphates, and sugars), classical thermodynamics would predict that such macromolecules will not spontaneously form.

Got it?

Feeling even dumber now?

rem

Pomegranate,

You still don't get it, but oh well.

Just because he states that 'classical thermodynamics would predict that such macromolecules will not spontaneously form' does not explain anything. The question is WHY? Are the macromolecules a closed system? How did he come to the conclusion that classical thermodynamics would predict this?

For example, I can change the surgeon's paragraph to this and it would make just as much sense:

"Since the important components of the human fetus (fingers, lungs, brain etc.) are more complex and energy rich than their precursors (shapeless blobs of cells), classical thermodynamics would predict that such fetal components will not spontaneously form."

The surgeon is just making a statement without backing it up with evidence. This is bad scholarship.

rem

Edited by - rem on 11 October 2002 14:1:7

IronGland

I think pome is just yanking our chains now. He's enjoying getting people riled up. He's just throwing out every cliched creationist argument to see who will bite. Either that or he is an extraordinarily stupid,lazy person for not even bothering to learn the basics of what he is arguing against. Pome if what you've posted in this thread are your true thoughts, why will you not even take a few minutes to learn something about the subject? Every argument you've brought forth can be answered if you would just spend, oh 5-10 minutes reading something about it. It doesn't mean it will change your views, but don't you feel you should know at least as much as a 6th grade grad. before you argue against something?

What type of 'doctor' exactly are you studying to be? Probably a chiropractor, or something to do with crystals. :)

One more question, in this picture http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=33347&site=3 , are you the one standing, or the one with a hook in your mouth?

Edited by - irongland on 11 October 2002 14:9:19

pomegranate

Insults betray a sure loser.

Or is that SORE loser?

Edited by - pomegranate on 11 October 2002 14:27:5

pomegranate

<click> Ignore IronGland feature on.

You know, I LOVE talking about this stuff. But I don't think it needs to get insulting.

I believe IG crossed the line, so the heck with him. I figure I'll do the same for everyone else that lobs a childish insult at me.

That's fair don't you think?

So, now where? How about DNA?

Evolution or creation?

Share this