Jeptha has burst onto the scene with his usual overconfident bluster. He will imply - or say outright - that he is right on nearly every tpic he writes about, while others in those fields are, of course, all wrong. Indeed, Jep has already denigrated Randy over entropy. Below is a post from ARN (the link appears to be dead, but I believe it is still available in their archives) in which Jep "informs" a poster named Pixie all about entropy and how it relates to evolution. I find this post to be quite informative as to Jeptha's actual level of undersanding of the things he writes about. Couching ignorance in technical-sounding jargon, propped up with bluster and confidence, is still ignorance. Emphases mine:
Hi Pixie: Present in the physical laws of our universe is an effective law of decay. Energy and energy exchange is the driving force of our universe. And order to disorder is the governing principle of this energy as it interacts within the universe. Fires burn out, they never become bigger over the course of time as they deplete their energy. Batteries exhaust their energy supply, they donít recharge themselves through usage. Air escapes from a tire when it is punctured, it never concentrates itself into the tire on its own. The gas tank of your car cannot fill itself as you drive. You will always run out of gas if you do not manually refill the tank. The sun will burn out over time, not get bigger and brighter through infinity. Organisms wane old and die, never will they get younger and healthier as they age. Shiny new cars will eventually end up as a pile of rust in the junkyard. Pristine new homes will always deteriorate as they age with time, if left alone. Throughout nature we see this collective directive in effect that governs our universe in the process of new to old, order to disorder with almost every energy exchange. This law is one of the most fascinating laws of science and is called the Second Law of Thermodynamics, henceforth known as SLOT. The measurement of this law, is called entropy. Entropy is perhaps one of the least understood words in the realm of science. If SLOT dictates that entities in the natural world age and die, go from new to old, wear out and break down, then since entropy is a measurement of this law, entropy is also the measurement of disorder. The more entropy we have in a system, the more disorder we have in it. If entropy decreases, then something can be said to have ordered. But entropy is not ALWAYS disorder. It just is in the way that I will use the term during the course of this debate. SLOT may be defined accordingly: With any spontaneous reaction or event, entropy will tend to increase. There are three entropies that affect the human organism. Thermodynamic entropy always deals with heat, and rises in the organism slowly but steadily, until it eventually kills the organism. Thermodynamic entropy affects the individual organism, but not necessarily macroevolution in the population. Logical entropy is just along for the ride considering the organism. Logical entropy has nothing to do with heat and is just order/disorder. Logical entropy actually decreases as the organism matures through the growth cycle. Because the organism orders and grows. It then begins to increase as the organism ages, dies and decomposes. Logical entropy really has more to do with macroevolution than the individual organism, because SLOT forbids complexity from forming over time via spontaneous reactions as would have had to occur during complex macroevolution. Finally, it is informational entropy that pumps the silver bullet deep into the heart of complex macroevolution. Genes are code--genetic information. For this process to have happened, the human genome would have had to grow extremely complex, both quantitatively and qualitatively, over a period of millions of years. The genome would have had to increase itself from a unicelled organism with under 500 genes into what we see today, a complex organism called Homo Sapien with between 33,000 and 75,000 genes. Yet, SLOT through another measurement called informational entropy, tells us that as information is spread, it will degrade, not order. And when our scientists look at the human genome today, they see stark degradation, not complexity. Why is this, and how could complex macroevolution ever occurred in violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics? The conclusion is that it is impossible for complex macroevolution to have occurred. It would have violated perhaps the most well tested and most universal law of science: the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Thank you, Pixie. You may now counterpoint and point
The number of gems in there is significant. I proposed a simple test of Jep's assertions: Take the temperature of an infant and an adult. If the adult's temperature is not significantly higher than the infant's, then Jep's claim is falsified. As I recall, Jep hemmed and hawed and said he meant something else etc... Such is the creationist way. For a more in-depth expose on Jeptha's 'debate style', I will post the closing post from me in our "formal" debate that was held on the old OCW board prior to the ReMine-Williams hack attack. The admin may well wish to close that thread so as to not re-open the proverbial can of worms. It will be a good cautionary tale about investing th etime to try to discuss anything with Jerry DOn.
[This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-14-2003]
I'm beginning to become concerned about the potential for debates between you and Jeptha to deteriorate into a series of charges and counter-charges. I'm going to let history be my guide and stop it before it starts. The thermodynamic issue is a valid topic for this forum, but please take the personal off-topic stuff to the Free For All forum.
Oh, I have no intention of debating Jep. I have already been there. It is no debate at all. It is evolutionist-Point and creationist-Counter-red herring-tangent- accusation-dismissal-etc.
That is why I may post the close of our 'formal' debate. It shows quite well - and repeatedly - that Jep, like most creationists, simply pecks at minutiae when he knows he has lost. Or maybe he doesn't know it. And that could be part of the problem.