MPW writes:
To me, that makes NO sense at all. Are you trying to throw me off here?
No, I'm using the standard calculation of information according to information theory. I gave you the formula and explained how it works. Wherever a few are selected out of many, information has increased. Since you conceded that selection operates (even if only within "kinds," whatever that is), you've necessarily conceded that information increases.
Whatever you were trying to say, INFORMATION HAS NEVER BEEN ADDED TO THE GENE CODE.
Let me ask you this: What
would consititute an information addition in the gene code, according to you? How would you measure it? Do you know? I'll suggest refraining from speculation if you don't.
You have just proved my point. Firstly I did not get that from Hovind's website, I got that from the second law of thermodynamics. (The entropy of the universe is always increasing)
The 2ndLoT saying nothing of what you first claimed it did. It does not say things are "running down," nor that things are "getting worse." This is the
Creationist definition of the 2ndLoT, and as far as physicists know, it is not valid in this universe.
And technology, hehe, proves that it takes INTELLIGENT ENERGY to make something get better!!!
That was just an example. See crashfrog's or JonF's examples in this thread where we've observed the emergence of new traits in bacteria, including nylon digestion and phage resistance.
BTW - evolution only deals with change, not with concepts of "better" or "worse."
Everything goes down the tubes with time
Again, this is not what the 2ndLoT states. "Entropy" in the thermodynamic sense has to do with the amount of useable energy in a system, and has nothing to do with "order" or "disorder." Prigogine won his Nobel Prize by demonstrating that complex and orderly dissipative structures can form spontaneously in non-equilibrium thermodynamics.
If evolution is true, where did the laws of thermodynamics come from anyway?
Why do you believe that it came from anything at all? It seems from our observations that it simply is.
Again, flawed reasoning. Pluto is in orbit.
How do you know? You've never observed it orbit the sun.
Keep in mind, this is your reasoning I'm using.
Reading your pluto example mmight make sense at first, but if you think, it doesn't compare in the least. We see what pluto is doing now. It likely has gone around the sun, and will go around the sun.
We see what biological organisms are "doing now," and it is likely that they have been changing over the entire history of their existence just as we've observed them in the present.
But you cannot prove that it has reversed direction 8 times and became purple, than orange, then green, and now blue!! Thats what you are trying to tell me about the animals.
Don't put words in my mouth. I have argued none of this that you claim I have. This is an argument of your own imagination, and I'd appreciate it if you'd come back to reality and deal with the actual facts of the matter.
We see them dong the same things, cats having cats, dogs having dogs, just like pluto goes around the sun! But ten you try to tell me that they went from a fish to a frog to a dinasour to a bird, thats like saying that pluto has reversed direction 8 times and became purple, than orange, then green, and now blue!!
Again, Your argument is evidence for my theory, not yours.
Sigh... so much ignorance abounds, it's disheartening. Your claim that a cat cannot become a non-cat implies that you know of a barrier that would prevent it. Please, as I've asked before, present this barrier and a methodology of testing for its existence.
Different for every animal. I already gave tons of examples.
No, you've offered nothing but unsubstantiated assertions. Not a single example was offered. You are, of course, free to run around shouting loudly that the sky is green, but the fact of the matter is that the sky is blue and no amount of shouting will change that. The same is true with the hypothetical barrier between micro and macro evolution. You can continue to shout that it exists, but if you can't demonstrate it, all you have is hot air.
Animals can change and vary and adapt but they can NEVER be something else!
Why not? What is to stop a bunch of little changes adding up to big ones with time?
If I begin piling soil in front of you with a shovel, what is to prevent the slowly forming hill from eventually becoming a mountain?
If I begin walking due westward in St. Louis, MO, what's to stop my little 3-foot steps from eventually adding up to hundreds of miles?
The answer to all of these questions is "Nothing." You've conceded that change happens. As a result, information increases. Over time, little changes can add up to big ones. These are the facts, and I suggest you get used to them.