|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5053 days) Posts: 125 From: Brooklyn, New York Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Truth About Evolution and Religion | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
dkroemer writes: Anyone who understands the second law knows that it was the decrease in entropy of the sun that caused the entropy of living organisms to increase. Try:
Anyone who understands the second law knows that it is the increase in entropy of the sun that causes the entropy of the biosphere to decrease. Edited by bluegenes, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Coragyps writes: I think Mrs Cornwell called that a "conditional phrase" back in High School English class. What do Campbell and Reece say in the next few sentences? Or do I have to go look up for myself what that "if" anticipates? You don't have to, and it's predictable. Next sentence:
"However, the precise primary structure of a protein is determined not by the random linking of amino acids, but by inherited genetic information." Much later, after a brief explanation of DNA and how mutations can change proteins, they say this:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
fizz57102 writes: is it possible for entropy to locally decrease? I have been trying to get you to say "yes" to this and for some reason you have so far refused to do so. Your statement in message 350 seems to indicate you know that this is so, once the evident typo is corrected - at least, I hope it is a typo... You might be being generous on the typo, but one does hope so! dk seems to have some serious comprehension problems in other areas, as well. When I pointed out that mistake, he ignored my comment. Had it been a typo, wouldn't we expect an "oops! sorry! I'll correct that" type of post? Welcome to EvC, BTW.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Huntard writes: I think you made a typo yourself Not necessarily. The point (2) is not necessarily referring to point (1), but to the local increase in the sun, which is why Fizz ends with the point about whether or not it is sufficient to account for the local decrease here. I agree that it's slightly confusing, though.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined:
|
Huntard writes: Like you said, it's a bit confusing. Actually, the whole damned thread's confusing, because it's hard to figure what its author is actually trying to say! He repeatedly refers to one book by "neo-Darwinist" authors which is actually meant to be, at least partially, an explanation of how mutations and selection can and do increase complexity! Kirschner & Gerhart use the phrase "facilitated variation" in much the same way that I would use the phrase "evolved evolvability". They are saying that early natural selection has favoured a system which can make it easy to produce variations which enable modern organisms to adapt and produce novel features by conserving the essentials and randomly varying in productive areas, particularly regulatory genes. Why the author of the O.P. rambles on about this, and how he connects it to his comments on his god is a mystery. It's actually interesting biology!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined:
|
dkroemer writes: Facilitated variation is an improvement over natural selection.... dk writes: However, non-biologists and crackpots who say there was so much time and so many organism and so many mutations that common descent is explained by natural selection are violating the second law of thermodynamics. Do you understand what I'm saying when I point out that what Kirschner and Gerhart describe as "facilitated variation" is itself a product of random variation and natural selection? It is put forward by them to explain the phenomenon of relatively rapid (in geological time) diversification and increases in complexity in organisms in recent evolution (the last 500 million years, basically). It has been selected for itself because of its obvious advantages in adaption. It is put forward as an explanation of the "variation" part of Darwins theory. They describe it as "Resolving Darwin's Dillemma" because Darwin had no way of knowing how the variation that he observed was produced. (He didn't even know about "genes" anyway). People who explain the diversity of life around us, speciation, and therefore common descent as happening under the broad umbrella description of "variation and natural selection" are not "violating the 2nd LoT". That's pretty much what it actually comes down to, and the "facilitated variation" or "evolved adaptability" that you've latched on to is part of the process. So, what's your problem, exactly?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Doesn't his logolepsy aggravate your parasomnia?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Meaning you think that our acosmic friend is an acataleptic onanist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Straggler writes: OK you win the smartass of the thread award. I tried - and failed. You did well. This thread just started to make sense from your post onwards.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2476 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Iblis writes: Got it, finally. Yes, I think you've probably read well between the lines. That's why I've been throwing cold water on the gist of things by pointing out that the original Great Facilitator of "facilitated variation" itself is actually our old friend natural selection, something that the authors of the phrase would agree with.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024