A little of your post brings up the point of the second law.
You brought it up in post 13 for the first time. By post 25 you had been given a site that gives a lot of detail and a definition of it.
After pointing out to you that you shouldn't have mentioned it I would expect you to drop the whole thing. Instead you kept going and going. You think that it is going to be ignored.
The 2nd law is still plastered on web sites that have had time to know better. I, for one, won't ignore the dishonest misuse of science by them. If you wish to perpetuate that misuse then I won't ignore it here either.
Instead we did another multi-page tango about an off the cuff statement I made, with my meanspirited accusers INSISTING on keeping on keeping on with this, doing their dead level best to make a fool outa buz, the fundie creo.
Ok it was an off the cuff remark. I kinda knew that. When it was first pointed out to you that it didn't matter to the issue at hand a good response would have been:
"You're right, it was just a quick off-the-cuff remark. I shouldn't have stuffed it in there."
It was your dragging it out and not doing that that has made you look a bit foolish. Much more foolish than being wrong about the 2nd law.
Can you spell c r e a t i o n i s m? I was debating as a creationist, and not as an evolutionist. Get it?
There is nothing in your creationist viewpoint that you have brought up that has anything to do with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The 2nd law is a scientific concept. Why do you mention the creationist view then? This is the sort of thing that is "obfuscating".
You've run out of things to comment on the 2nd law after having thrown it out. We did the open, closed issue, the energy from the sun issue and so on. All of them attempts by you to keep bringing up some relevance of the 2nd law.
Now that we've finished with going over that you're bringing up creationism but have yet to explain why it matters here.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 11-08-2004 12:23 AM