Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
93 online now:
kjsimons, nwr (2 members, 91 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,045 Year: 5,157/6,534 Month: 577/794 Week: 68/135 Day: 8/6 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Light Time Problem
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 74 of 257 (893807)
04-20-2022 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by candle2
04-19-2022 5:30 PM


candle2 writes:

Why do evolutionists ignore the best proved
law of physics--law of increasing entropy. The
second Law of Thermodynamics applies not
only in physical and chemistry, but in biological
and geological. They all lose order.

Evolutionary systems are expected to increase
in order and complexity. However, no exception
to the 2nd Law has ever been found.


Page one of the thermodynamics textbook:
thermo = heat
dynamics = movement
Thermodynamics is about the movement of heat.

You're confused in thinking that the arrangement of "stuff" is relevant. Thermodynamics is not about the organization of stuff. It's about the organization of heat. Thermodynamics does not say that stuff can not become more organized. Thermodynamics says that heat spreads out.

A good example of the second law is a cup of hot coffee sitting on the table. Put your hand above it. You can feel the heat moving. Eventually, the heat will spread out to fill the whole room. If you had a sensitive enough thermometer, you could measure the rise in temperature of the room.

Now look at a chemical reaction:

2 H2 + O2 --> 2 H2
Water is certainly more orderly than hydrogen or oxygen, so simple observation shows that your idea of thermodynamics is wrong.

And guess what. That reaction produces large quantities of heat (hint: the Hindenburg). That means that the water is more stable than the hydrogen and oxygen. The Second Law means that a system will inevitably move toward a more stable configuration - even if it makes the stuff more orderly.

Why don't creationists understand that? Why do they tell you nonsense about thermodynamics?


"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by candle2, posted 04-19-2022 5:30 PM candle2 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by candle2, posted 04-20-2022 3:55 PM ringo has replied
 Message 80 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2022 5:25 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 79 of 257 (893817)
04-20-2022 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by candle2
04-20-2022 3:55 PM


candle2 writes:

Nothing moves towards the more orderly,
regardless of whether it is in a so-called
open or closed system.


Did you not read my post at all? Hydrogen and oxygen move toward a more orderly system - water.

The second law is NOT about order of things. It's about order of energy. A more orderly system of things - e.g. water - certainly CAN come from a less orderly system.

You can see that. Why do you deny it?


"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by candle2, posted 04-20-2022 3:55 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 85 of 257 (893849)
04-21-2022 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by dwise1
04-20-2022 5:25 PM


dwise1 writes:

... life itself would also violate that same law and hence be impossible.


As I tried to point out to candle, almost all chemical compounds defy his misunderstanding. They are, by definition, more complex than their constituents. By candle's misunderstanding, it would be impossible to make chemical compounds. Not to mention that it would be impossible to crystalize anything. And on and on....

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2022 5:25 PM dwise1 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 101 of 257 (893892)
04-22-2022 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by candle2
04-21-2022 1:37 PM


candle2 writes:

Tanyptery, my point is that it does not take
tens or hundreds of millions of years to create
either diamonds or oil.


It didn't "have" to take thousands of years to build Rome either - but it did.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by candle2, posted 04-21-2022 1:37 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(4)
Message 102 of 257 (893893)
04-22-2022 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by candle2
04-21-2022 6:19 PM


candle2 writes:

College should be a place where people can
exchange ideas, but certain ideas are taboo.


Well, lies are taboo everywhere, except in your church, apparently. Evolution-denial is a lie, a bold-faced lie - as Mark Twain would call it, a damned lie. Climate-change-denial is also a lie and a damned lie - damn near a criminal lie.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by candle2, posted 04-21-2022 6:19 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 133 of 257 (893949)
04-24-2022 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by candle2
04-23-2022 5:04 PM


candle2 writes:

There is no way to prove evolution.

If it were provable, everyone would
accept it.


Everybody who uses their brain does accept it.

candle2 writes:

Evolutionists want people to disregard
their common sense....


Dirt is common; it isn't very valuable. By all means yes, do disregard your so-called common sense and look at the evidence.

candle2 writes:

There are no transitional fossils.


Liar.

(You also lied in Message 66 about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and I corrected you in Message 74 and Message 79. I.\'m still waiting for you to acknowledge that you were wrong.)

candle2 writes:

None of these fossils come with a tag on
them, stating how old they are.


They really do though.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by candle2, posted 04-23-2022 5:04 PM candle2 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by candle2, posted 04-28-2022 11:24 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 140 of 257 (894003)
04-28-2022 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by candle2
04-28-2022 11:24 AM


candle2 writes:

Evolution is neither a logical nor a consistent theory.


Wrong. And wrong.

candle2 writes:

The theory (which is a a stretch of the imagination to
even call it a theory) is not based on empirical science.


Wrong again. And wrong again.

Do you know what a theory is? Please tell us what you think it is.

candle2 writes:

For the sake of being honest, let's call it a hypothesis;
albeit, a weak one.


No. Let's not. Let's call you an ignorant liar instead.

candle2 writes:

There is only one type of evolution that has even a tiny
hint of science behind it. And that is microevolution.


The standard response to that silly statement is that you might as well distinguish micro-walking from macro-walking. You might as well say that you can walk to the corner store but you can't walk to New York. That's nonsense, of course. Macro is just made up of a whole lot of micro added together.

candle2 writes:

Even microevolution isn't true evolution. It is nothing
more than changes in gene frequencies within a species.


What do you think "true evolution" is? You think it's something stupid like dogs turning into cats, don't you. That's what those stupid lying creationists have told you, isn't it?

candle2 writes:

No new information is acquired.


Every mutaion produces new information, just like every sentence that somebody types produces new information.

candle2 writes:

All finches in the Galapagos are still finches.


And they are different species because they have adapted to different situations.

candle2 writes:

All the
different breeds of dogs are still just dogs.


What did you expect them to be?

candle2 writes:

One can
say that minute changes over eons of time can lead
to the creation of new species/kind, but that belief
is based on faith, not science.


Liar.

candle2 writes:

Isolation can lead to speciation, which might lead to
some animals of the same kind no longer being
capable of reproducing, but this is a loss of
information.


Who said evolution required an increase in information? A different species of finch has different information but not necessarily "more" information.

candle2 writes:

It is not evolution in any form of the
Word.


Again, tell us what you think evolution is. You seem to be thoroughly ignorant on the subject - but tell us what you think it is.

candle2 writes:

Humans have not observed one species of animal
evolving into another species of animal (organism).


Liar. Google "Has one species evolved into another species?"

candle2 writes:

Humans have no transitional fossils, when we should
have tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions.


Liar. Google "What is a transitional fossil example?"

candle2 writes:

Some say that complex chemicals created life. And, I
say prove it.


They're working on it. Be prepared to lie about it when they succeed.

candle2 writes:

Replicate the process. Guess work isn't
science.


Neither is your lying.

candle2 writes:

The facts are all on my side.


There is nothing but lies on your side. Do you think lying for Jersus is a good thing?

candle2 writes:

It comes down to science
and creation vs. evolutionary hypothesis.


Creationism has nothing to do with science. The THEORY of Evolution wins by a landslide.

You didn't respond to anything I said in Message 133. And I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that you lied about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics in Message 66.


"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by candle2, posted 04-28-2022 11:24 AM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 159 of 257 (894151)
05-03-2022 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by candle2
05-02-2022 3:10 PM


candle2 writes:

It is such a simple request, and I am completely
justified in asking for it.


Well, not "completely" justified. There are (at least) two things against you:
1. None of you guys has ever defined properly what a "kind" is. It's not a scientific concept. If you want scientific evidence, you have to define scientifically what you want.
2. As others have pointed out, your idea of "evolution" is complete and utter nonsense.

candle2 writes:

I want what any competent
individual (especially what a competent scientist
should demand), and that is empirical and
operational evidence.


But you're not a competent individual. You're thoroughly incompetent to discuss anything related to science.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by candle2, posted 05-02-2022 3:10 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 170 of 257 (894187)
05-06-2022 11:51 AM


candle2 writes:
Not only are
my views based on the Bible; they are also based on
real science.
Your views on thermodynamics are not based on real science. I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that.
candle2 writes:
The big difference is that I put more trust
in observational science (true science) than
historical science.
No you don't. Have you ever observed water? The existence of water proves that your ideas about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics are false. If simple structures - e.g. H2 and O2 could not spontaneously become more complex - e.g. H2O, then water could not exist. Your view is 100% opposite from observational science. Your view is 100% wrong.
But you won't acknowledge that obvious fact, will you? Because you prefer creationist lies to real science.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 195 of 257 (894260)
05-08-2022 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by candle2
05-07-2022 6:00 PM


Re: You're missing the real message
candle2 writes:
Perhaps, I am wrong to post at all since I can't seem
to find the time required to address everyone.
You have the time to post lies. And when people expose your lies, instead of responding you post more lies.
We don't need any more of your lies. Defend the lies you have already told.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by candle2, posted 05-07-2022 6:00 PM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 202 of 257 (894415)
05-15-2022 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by candle2
05-13-2022 2:02 PM


Re: SHOW US, candle2!
candle2 writes:
I would also like for you to
list your absolute proofs.
1. Science doesn't deal in proofs. It deals in evidence.
2. Science doesn't deal in absolutes.
candle2 writes:
If you cannot provide proof,
please state that it an assumption.
False dichotomy.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by candle2, posted 05-13-2022 2:02 PM candle2 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by candle2, posted 05-21-2022 10:10 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 206 of 257 (894479)
05-17-2022 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by candle2
05-17-2022 9:00 AM


Re: SHOW US, candle2!
candle2 writes:
First, God is not trying to save all humans during this
present age. More than 99% of those who call themselves
Christians don't understand this.
I think everybody understands that that is your belief. We also understand that God "saving" us from Himself is a ridiculous concept.
But your religious rubbish has nothing to do with the topic. Stop adding more nonsense and discuss the nonsense that you've already posted.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by candle2, posted 05-17-2022 9:00 AM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 234 of 257 (894556)
05-21-2022 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by candle2
05-21-2022 10:10 AM


Re: SHOW US, candle2!
candle2 writes:
Well, courts of law also deal in evidence, but they
are oftentimes wrong.

Proof can prove or disprove something beyond a
shadow of a doubt.
Proof "beyond a shadow of a doubt" is just a cute phrase that lawyers use. It has no basis in reality. Courts deal in reasonable doubt.
And courts are wrong more often than science. Science is self-correcting.
candle2 writes:
Evidence alone cannot do this.
Nothing can prove an idea "beyond a shadow of a doubt".
candle2 writes:
Evidence is open
to Interpretation. And one's interpretation is almost
always slanted by presuppositions.
No.
Science is a collective procedure. Scientists point out each other's presuppositions. A Christian scientist and a Muslim scientist can cancel out each other's presuppositions.
You should get a clue how science works before you parrot the lies that creationists have told you.
Now, please respond to Message 74.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by candle2, posted 05-21-2022 10:10 AM candle2 has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19614
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 251 of 257 (894600)
05-23-2022 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by candle2
05-21-2022 11:28 AM


Re: SHOW US, candle2!
candle2 writes:
Many of those who work on the excavation of
these fossils claim that it still has the "stench
of death." Imagine that.
Yeah, you pretty much have to use your imagination because there doesn't appear to be any confirmation anywhere on the internet.
Just out of curiosity, how long do you think the "stench of death" lingers on bones?
candle2 writes:
The flooding, they insist, drowned these thousands
of animals, and quickly covered them with mud;
thereby, preserving the fossils.
No. That is not what they say at all:
quote
Data from the fossils collected at Hilda indicate that death and final burial were caused by separate flooding events. For example, many of the ceratopsian carcasses at Hilda were trampled, broken and scavenged by other dinosaurs before final burial. source
So the dinosaurs were killed by one flood, the flood receded and then the carcasses were eaten by scavengers and then the bones were buried by another flood. And you think they would still smell?
candle2 writes:
Tissue samples from the numerous sites show
that these animals died just a few thousand
years ago, and not tens of millions.
That's a lie.
Scientists Find Soft Tissue in 75-Million-Year-Old Dinosaur Bones
Ancient tissue found in 195 million-year-old dinosaur rib
candle2 writes:
The site in Hilda is said to have been caused by a
"monster storm," that was geographically isolated.
You quoted the phrase "monster storm" but you didn't cite any reference. Here's what I found:
quote
The dinosaurs may have, apparently been part of a mass die-off resulting from a monster storm, comparable to today's hurricanes, which struck what was then a coastal area. source
candle2 writes:
The large site in America isn't treated with the
same degree of common sense, even though the
best explanation is a "global flood."
"Common sense" would suggest that there is evidence for many "geographically isolated" floods - your own quote - but NO evidence for a global flood.

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by candle2, posted 05-21-2022 11:28 AM candle2 has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022