Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design in Universities
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 259 of 310 (206143)
05-08-2005 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Jerry Don Bauer
05-04-2005 3:56 AM


false start, again
just an observation of a point I have not seen addressed in this topic.
Jerry "predicts"
1) ID predicts that genomes are at their best when they are just designed and the second law of thermodynamics takes it from there to DEVOLVE genomes in direct opposition to the musings of Darwin
For this "prediction" to have any meaning then there has to be a substantiatable point in time where the stage of "just designed" can be determined and identified. Failing that, it should be easy to demonstrate a long term trend within the fossil record that clearly demonstrates "devolution" from a more perfect ancestry.
I await Jerry's effort to point to such a stage in the fossil record that demonstrates an actual stage of human ancestry showing a "higher" state from which we have since progressively "devolved" to our current state.
without any evidence of such a {just created state} or {long term devolutionary trend} the "prediction" is falsified from the start as it is based on a false precept.
modern studies of genetics (such as have been cited in other posts on this thread) are insufficient on this issue due to their only speaking of the present condition: what we need is independent evidence that the current state is actually a "devolved" state and not just a natural result.
such evidence should also show that nothing closely resembling "human" exists prior to this theoretical "just design" stage in order to demonstrate a definite level of {design} input required to reach that "just designed" stage, for failure to do this invalidates the concept of "devolution" in this regard.
enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Jerry Don Bauer, posted 05-04-2005 3:56 AM Jerry Don Bauer has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 260 of 310 (206149)
05-08-2005 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by PaulK
05-08-2005 1:41 PM


closed or open system?
PaulK --
I've read most of this thread but not all, and it seems to me that nobody has addressed the issue of entropy applying to individual organisms.
is the entropy of an individual more or less after eating a meal?
is the entropy of an 18 year old more or less than that of a 2 year old?
the ability of humans to add energy to their systems by consumtion of calories means that it is an open system. this is reflected in the regular production of new cells that replace the cells within a body on a regular basis (it takes something like 30 days to generate a whole new skin).
thanks.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2005 1:41 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2005 3:59 PM RAZD has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 262 of 310 (206169)
05-08-2005 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by PaulK
05-08-2005 3:59 PM


Re: closed or open system?
I thought he started with thermodynamic, particularly in relation to comments to paisano?
ABE:
****
and the "prediction" refered to
1) ID predicts that genomes are at their best when they are just designed and the second law of thermodynamics takes it from there to DEVOLVE genomes in direct opposition to the musings of Darwin
now if he has equivocated to a different definition ...
This message has been edited by RAZD, 05*08*2005 04:34 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2005 3:59 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by PaulK, posted 05-08-2005 5:10 PM RAZD 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