Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Intellectual Honesty

Pages: (8) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] >

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,00:21    Cogzoid, I agree with you.  Evopeach is not wrong, except that he claimed that I was wrong for not including gsubc.  If you were to go back and look at the discussion, I kept trying to say that it doesn't matter, especially because I was making a point, but Evopeach only wanted to quibble over gsubc, and not the original argument.  This all came about when Evopeach tried to talk about the second law of thermodynamics.  I said it has as much to do with evolution as F=ma, and instead of addressing that, he jumped on me, saying I was wrong and stupid and all kinds of things for not including gsubc.

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,04:59    Dan and GCT ((mutual CYA brothers) http://wshs.wtvl.k12.me.us/~physics361/mechanics/treelaws.html The Second Law: Whenever an object accelerates, the acceleration is a) directly proportional to the NET force acting on the object; b) pointing in the same direction as the net force;and c) inversely proportional to the mass of the object. http://www.euclideanspace.com/physics/dynamics/linear/ The relationship between force and acceleration is quantified by Newtons second law which says that the acceleration is: Proportional to the net external force. Inversely proportional to its mass. In the direction of the force. So if we choose the units correctly, then: F=ma Wikopedia: In mathematics, two quantities are called proportional if they vary in such a way that one of the quantities is a constant multiple of the other, or equivalently if they have a constant ratio. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal In mathematics, two mathematical objects are considered equal if they are precisely the same in every way. This defines a binary predicate, equality, denoted "="; x = y iff x and y are equal. Equivalence in the general sense is provided by the construction of a equivalence relation between two elements. A statement that two expressions denote equal quantities is an equation. See equals is not the same as proportional which is Newton's precise language. Proportional always infers a constant of proportionality which is universally called gsubc. Depending on the units it is either explicitly or implicitly stated but it is always there, period. Now CYA twins the only other thing you require is the following definition: grovel: To  lie or crawl in a prostrate position. Wouldn't you like to win just one little point someday instead of always being made to grovel.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,05:18    Cogzoid, See what I mean?

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,06:27    GCT: Now that you have a better comprehension of Newton's 2nd law we can indeed return to the thermo question. You contend that evolution and thermo are two completely disjoint areas of science. Thisis if one were to represent evolution and thermo as two Venn diagrams there would be zero common area of intersection between the two. Thus in the areas of studying the chemistry of the cell lets say where an understanding of the rates of reaction, ph, temperature, pressure, etc. migh just be a consideration to synthetically producing a protein like insulin commercially one would lay out the process with due consideration to all the conditions necessary to make the production effective and efficient and proceed. That would indeed require a detailed knowledge of thermodynamic considerations such as enthalpy, entropy, free energy, reaction rates, etc. Are you now saying that the study of the cellular machinery in order to develop new drugs is unrelated to and independent of evolutionary theory?

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,07:16    Evopeach, 1.  My understanding of Newton's Second Law has not changed. 2.  My comment still stands.  SLOT has as much to do with evolution as Newton's Second Law.  ToE does not violate SLOT, and SLOT does not operate on ToE.

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,08:44    GCT, Your understanding indeed hasn't changed you were an uniformed dolt before and you remain the same in the face of black and white authoritative evidence to the contrary. I have not said that evolution contradicts slot in the case of evolutionary biology rather I define the flow through energy system that makes it possible for biological systems to remain in far from equilibrium states. However if the source of energy is removed from say a plant or an animal for an extended period it withers, diassociates, returns to a minimum energy, maximum entropy, state called equibrium. In the case of life its also known as death. Can you tell us what physical law governs the process of decay, disassociation, randomization and the tendency toward breakdown, decay and the return to equilibrium in physical processes everywhere we observe. 1) The law of gravity 2) F=ma/gsubc 3) Jude Law 4) Marshal Dillon 5) SLOT I'll give you six chances to get it right.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,08:51    Plants and animals need energy to survive.  Wow, what insight.  We should be paying you for this.  What's your point?

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,08:57    GCT, Answer the question butthead, its very straight forward. Otherwise I will conclude you once again are totally dishonest. I assure you I don't need to be paid for this missionary to the heathen work.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,09:04    The process can not violate any of the actual laws listed.  What's your point?

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,09:12    GCT, So you can't answer the question. I knew it and you once again are proven to be a dolt.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,09:16    Quote (GCT @ Oct. 19 2005,14:04) The process can not violate any of the actual laws listed.  What's your point? Um, question answered.  What's your point?

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 19 2005,09:27    Can you tell us what physical law governs the process of decay, disassociation, randomization and the tendency toward breakdown, decay and the return to equilibrium in physical processes everywhere we observe? Is that the question you are answering because thats the question I asked? Your answer reflects no understanding or comprehension of the question asked as the word violation nor the phrase violation of appears anywhere in the question. Try again

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2005,05:38    No, my answer demonstrates that I understand better than you do. The processes you cite can not violate SLOT, nor can they violate F=MA, nor any other law.  I know what you want me to say.  You want me to say that SLOT "governs" the process, but that IMO would not be very precise.

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2005,05:57    Funny, I thought SLOT described the movement of heat within a system. What's that got to do with decay? Henry

evopeach Posts: 248 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2005,07:02    I post these three among hundreds of possible sources which support my position and destroy youre. But I realize that no level of authoritative statement no matter the source will change your mind to admits error because you people are egomaniacal wireheads and intellectual honesty is beyond your reach. the second law of thermodynamics drives cars, computers and metabolism; and death, at the very least, opens up tenured faculty positions"---Seth Lloyd, writing in Nature 430, 971 (26 August 2004); doi:10.1038/430971a Wikopedia Disorder and the second law of thermodynamics We can view Ù as a measure of the disorder in a system. This is reasonable because what we think of as "ordered" systems tend to have very few configurational possibilities, and "disordered" systems have very many. As an illustration of this idea, consider a set of 100 coins, each of which is either heads up or tails up. The macrostates are specified by the total number of heads and tails, whereas the microstates are specified by the facings of each individual coin. For the macrostates of 100 heads or 100 tails, there is exactly one possible configuration, corresponding to the most "ordered" state in which all the coins are facing the same way. The most "disordered" macrostate consists of 50 heads and 50 tails in any order, for which there are 100891344545564193334812497256 (100 choose 50) possible microstates. http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/second_law_of_thermodynamics.htm We might define life as a localised temporary region of decreasing entropy. Life builds up the improbable structure of its cells from the disordered materials around it. It does this, however, at the expense of increasing the entropy around it, and it always eventually DECAYS back to the disorder from which it came. A molecule, a crystal or  a planet form because they represent a lower potential energy than the alternative and are therefore more probable. A bacterial culture does not have this property and when life is extinct it returns to chaos .

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 21 2005,13:12    Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 19 2005,13:44) GCT, Can you tell us what physical law governs the process of decay, disassociation, randomization and the tendency toward breakdown, decay and the return to equilibrium in physical processes everywhere we observe. 1) The law of gravity 2) F=ma/gsubc 3) Jude Law 4) Marshal Dillon 5) SLOT I'll give you six chances to get it right. If such a process did, indeed, violate Jude Law, every woman in North America would weep. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

Swoosh Posts: 42 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 21 2005,14:33    Wow.. whudathunkit.  EvoP actually made a polite witticism.  That list is pretty funny. And to play devil's advocate against my own team here... What exactly is the argument about?  Maybe I'm not reading this thread thoroughly enough.  But by my understanding, SLOT has to figure in to evolution at its most basic levels.  Random mutation.  Old age and death.  Digestion.  ####, anything you look at, as long as its made up of the particles of nature is subject to SLOT.   SLOT has to figure in on both the formation and disintegration of biological (read: atomic and molecular) systems.  Call it the flow of heat.  Call it order at the expense of greater disorder elsewhere.  Restate SLOT any way you like, but no matter what it must be recognized that evolution is a natural process.  All natural processes follow the laws of physics, so SLOT must be operative in that process.  We all die eventually, a natural consequence of SLOT.  Is there some technicality I'm overlooking here? Now, EvoP might want to argue that SLOT is You-Know-Whose punishment for sin and all that other mumbo jumbo.  If he does so, he's back in quackville.  But otherwise, I have to say I believe he's correct here.

bystander Posts: 301 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2005,22:15    Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 01 2005,14:35) See F does not equal MA as in your stupid remarks. F is proportional to MA and the formula requires the addition of a constant which varies with the system of units, usually written F=ma/gsubc  and in the engineering system the constant of proportionality is 32.2 lb mass ft/lb force sec**2 Sorry F=MA full stop. American's need the proportionality because they don't use metric units. It's not some kind of universal constant. Force is in Newtons . Meter2 Mass is in Newtons Acceleration is in Meter2 bystander

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2005,07:20    Quote (Swoosh @ Oct. 21 2005,19:33) Wow.. whudathunkit.  EvoP actually made a polite witticism.  That list is pretty funny. And to play devil's advocate against my own team here... What exactly is the argument about?  Maybe I'm not reading this thread thoroughly enough.  But by my understanding, SLOT has to figure in to evolution at its most basic levels.  Random mutation.  Old age and death.  Digestion.  ####, anything you look at, as long as its made up of the particles of nature is subject to SLOT.   SLOT has to figure in on both the formation and disintegration of biological (read: atomic and molecular) systems.  Call it the flow of heat.  Call it order at the expense of greater disorder elsewhere.  Restate SLOT any way you like, but no matter what it must be recognized that evolution is a natural process.  All natural processes follow the laws of physics, so SLOT must be operative in that process.  We all die eventually, a natural consequence of SLOT.  Is there some technicality I'm overlooking here? Now, EvoP might want to argue that SLOT is You-Know-Whose punishment for sin and all that other mumbo jumbo.  If he does so, he's back in quackville.  But otherwise, I have to say I believe he's correct here. The problem is/was Evopeach was taking the position that SLOT is somehow a problem for evolution.  My position is that beyond saying that evolution does not violate SLOT, that the two really don't have a lot to do with each other. Evopeach was also elevating the role of SLOT to be some sort of guiding principle that acts on things, instead of a law.  My contention is/was that SLOT does not act on objects, etc., but instead acts as a rule that can not be violated, much the same as F=ma.

Pages: (8) < ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard