Creationism - a clearer picture?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
For starters on testable predictions, creationism predicts the first and second laws of thermodynamics which evolution science violates.

​

We'll go from there

---

No lets back it up a step and ask why if creationism (presumeably around since the writing of genesis) predicted laws 1 and 2 of thermodynamics so much was made of the scientists who discovered them....Hey why stop at the first two why not the 0th and 3rd as well? Oh yeah its because creation ex nihilo breaks the 0th law..But hey why not claim relativity, the Schroedinger wave equation and the big bang while your at it....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
Yet Punk Eek cannot provide a mechanism...

---

How about a small geographically and genetically isolated population (A)evolves faster than a large population where genes must take longer to reach fixation (B)...at some point the population (A) overcomes the geographical isolation and being more evolved to suit the environment supplants the population (B)....What we see in the fossil record unless we get very lucky and dig in the area of geographic confinement is an abrupt transition from the species that comprised population (B) and the initial population of (A) to the species which comprised the population (A) at the time of geographic breakout....Is that mechanism enough for you....

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
1. Tell me why this lion, even being a single one, with its ability means that it is not valid for a population to do the same.

---

1)The Lion in question died at age 8, average life span of lions in captivity 25... so she lived less than 25% of her expected life span...2)Lions need certain vitamins and the like they can only get from meat, there is no record of this veggy lion ever breeding, given that it is known that malnutrition can cause infertillity I doubt that on a veggy diet she could have bred.3)If a veggy lion can`t breed then lions as a species cannot be veggy...Well TC?

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
LUDh my...another baloney sandwitch? the population figures given in AIG assumes that populations have been doubling every 156 years since the flood....thats would mean that 150 years after the flood,16 people build the gigantic tower of Babel....must have been some engineering feat!!!

---

[/B][/QUOTE]And its even more impressive given that they were building the pyramids at the same time (Based on Theos assertion that the pyramids are post deluvian structures)....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Punisher:
...a population growth rate of 3.7% per year, or a doubling time of about 19 years.

---

And what do we get if we extrapolate this growth of 3.7% a year to the modern day?N = 8*1.037⁴⁰⁰⁰N = 1.0426*10⁶⁴Which is rather large by anyones standards....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
...Gould and others have labelled punctuated mechanism. It is simply a postulate as to why, with darwinian evolution's prediction of finding many transitional forms, there aren't any. What mechanism causes the sudden new morphology of irreducible complexity?

---

I posted this earlier but you seem to have missed it....How about a small geographically and genetically isolated population (A) evolves faster than a large population where genes must take longer to reach fixation (B)... at some point the population (A) overcomes the geographical isolation and being more evolved to suit the environment supplants the population (B)....What we see in the fossil record unless we get very lucky and dig in the area of geographic confinement is an abrupt transition from the species that comprised population (B) and the initial population of (A) to the species which comprised the population (A) at the time of geographic breakout....Is that mechanism enough for you?

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 03-04-2002]

Well it was just a simple definition of how punk eek works gleaned from actually reading up on what it is (unlike Theo apparently)...I did a quick search on askjeeves and found this though: http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/punk_eek.htmlEnjoy....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
So somebody please explain the mechanism of Punk Eek without just rehashing selection via geography. That is an incomplete explanation. As well, how would one falsify Punk Eek?

---

I already did a couple of times..."How about a small geographically and genetically isolated population (A) evolves faster than a large population where genes must take longer to reach fixation (B)... at some point the population (A) overcomes the geographical isolation and being more evolved to suit the environment supplants the population (B)....What we see in the fossil record unless we get very lucky and dig in the area of geographic confinement is an abrupt transition from the species that comprised population (B) and the initial population of (A) to the species which comprised the population (A) at the time of geographic breakout....Is that mechanism enough for you?"You seem to have failed to understand the bit that says positive mutations reach fixation in a small geographicaly and geneticaly isolated population faster than in a large geographicaly unconstrained population....Hence you don`t understand why the isolated population evolves faster than the large sister population...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
In response Gould and Eldridge modified Gouldschmit and came up with Punk Eek.

---

Actually Punk eek is a Darwinian idea..."Charles Darwin wrote in 1859:Only a small portion of the world has been geologically explored. Only organic beings of certain classes can be preserved in a fossil condition, at least in any great number. Widely ranging species vary most, and varieties are often at first local, -- both causes rendering the discovery of intermediate links less likely. Local varieties will not spread into other and distant regions until they are considerably modified and improved; and when they do spread, if discovered in a geological formation, they will appear as if suddenly created there, and will be simply classed as new species.
The Origin of Species, Chapter 14, p.439"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Theo:
The second law is entropy. The property of matter to move to simplicity. In order for macro-evolution to be true creationists believe adherents have to demonstrate an inherent self-organizing property of matter, which has never been observed. This would be crucial to the first cell forming and then being able to replicate and then move towards complexity, multiple celled animals ect. That's why we make such a big deal of the first cell, then single cell to man. By no known natural mechanism can a cell form by chance then evolve to the complexity of man no matter how much time is given. It is a violation of Entropy.

---

Firstly that would be the tendency for matter to become on average more disordered in the whole systemIts a violation of entropy in the same way as cleaning a room is, you know you go through the room cleaning and at the end the ammount of disorder in the room has decereased, have you violated the 2LOT then? The answer is you haven`t because the entropy of the universe as a whole has increased (or at best remained the same)....Life is a similar case sure the ammount of disorder is decreasing, but we also happen to be given energy from the sun to play with, ie while entropy decreases here it increases in the universe as a whole....Ergo no problem with 2LOT.....