Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,272 Year: 5,529/9,624 Month: 554/323 Week: 51/143 Day: 13/11 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   THE END OF EVOLUTION?
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2815 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 38 of 284 (502956)
03-14-2009 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by LucyTheApe
03-13-2009 9:18 PM


Re: 2ndLOT
Hi, Lucy.
I'm not a physicist, and my understanding of thermodynamics isn't the greatest out there. But, let me offer a few simple insights on the subject.
The common creationist argument is that complexity of a system cannot increase, because this would be a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. You are extending it to information now.
The problem (which has been pointed out to you) is that there are many cases where complexity can be seen to increase in the natural world. Snowflakes are a popular example: there are nice, pretty patterns that look organized, but they form through natural processes from water the evaporated into the atmosphere and condensed in clouds.
In fact, according to my understanding, entropy is technically decreased by lowering the temperature. So, your generalization of the principle behind 2LoT precludes, not only evolution, but also refrigerators and air conditioners.
The point I'm making here is that there are examples where your argument fails. Because your argument fails in some instances, you can't be sure it doesn't also fail in the case of evolution unless you test evolution specifically. In order to show that the argument works against evolution, you have to use case-specific evidence showing how evolution violates the 2LoT. But, so far, all you have done is present an overgeneralization of the principle, which is known to be violated by nature in some situations.

-Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by LucyTheApe, posted 03-13-2009 9:18 PM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2815 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 187 of 284 (506274)
04-24-2009 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by LucyTheApe
04-24-2009 11:08 AM


Re: Off topic??
Hi, Lucy.
Can an intelligent being violate 2LoT?
  • If not, why does a violation of 2LoT suggest intelligent guidance?
  • If so, what allows intelligence to break the rule that everything else must follow?
    Is intelligence the only thing that can break the rule?
    Why or why not? And, can you support it with evidence?

-Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by LucyTheApe, posted 04-24-2009 11:08 AM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2815 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 218 of 284 (506575)
04-27-2009 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Percy
04-26-2009 3:51 PM


Aside: Rate of Evolution
Hi, Percy.
Percy writes:
there is research indicating that human beings have been evolving at an increasingly rapid rate over the past 10,000 years, and that we're evolving at a more rapid rate today than at any time in our evolutionary history.
What does "evolving at a more rapid rate" mean?
Are they talking mutations per capita?
Maybe a mean difference in sequence between pairs of individuals?
Or, is it just referring to the quantity of mutations or unique sequences that are present in the population at large?

-Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Percy, posted 04-26-2009 3:51 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Percy, posted 04-27-2009 6:59 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024