Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

well, I only looked back to the pippard, Ross, and Capra quotes. Pippard and Ross's contexts aare totaally askew of biological systems wherein each animal is a separate "engine"
Capra is a kind of "pop" theology in science writer. He writes a number of "search for the higher being in Beers Law" kind of stuff (just kidding about the title but you get the drift).

Im more amused by his sweeping statements about "lack of proof or substance in evolution"
He forgets that evidence supports the concept and the theory , as do the b asic physical sciences that provide further evidence about geological processes.

Recent findings in genomic research have been enlightening. Its been seen that existing genomic lines have hard lines to each otther and times of evolution can be estimated by looking at the makeup and common genes and gene sequences that occur in totally different classes , orders, familiees as well as genus and species..

0 Replies

I have started a new topic, which may keep us entertained while Bib is away...

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Its part of the grand plan tto discuss evolution letter by letter. ill bet Bib is laughing in his (whatever the Irish believe is actual food).

................. Very Happy

................. Laughing

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

wandeljw wrote:
Bibliophile,

I am lost. Is there any assigned reading you can give us?

Oh No!, You didn't just ask Bibliohile for a list of assigned reading did you? This is a guy who claims to have read every book on evolution (and everything else) ever written. And he's a master of cut/paste... I dread looking back at this thread later. The list is going to be excruciating. The A2K moderators are going to have to add more disk space to the server... Owwwwwwwwww.

Ros: LOL.............. Laughing

You are soooooooo envious of my resources. :wink:

0 Replies

Einherjar wrote:

Earth is not a closed system, our solarsystem is close to being a closed system in that interactions with elements outside it are negligible.

If this is the case, as you believe it, Ein, then how did anyone ever establish the Second Law of Thermodynamics as being operable in a closed system?

0 Replies

JamesMorrison wrote:

This inevitable depletion of fossil fuels is certainly an imperfect example of a closed system but its eventual destiny of maximum entropy or chaos, seen in such a state of society, surely gives us a real world appreciation of fossil fuel loss and the heat death of civilization as we know it. JM

Sure, James, but are you declaring this as "evidence" for the Second Law of Thermodynamics?"

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

A more interesting question is who amongst us will be reading all those new posts by Bib?

CI: you WILL...as always...the perennial voyeur of Bib Topics - you just can't resist it...especially when the humour kicks in. :wink:

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

I suspect hes looking up something else.

Farmer: you are too suspicious my friend. I thought that after 16 QUOTATIONS on "what evolutionists have published" you all would have learned something new...viz. there is much division amongst evolutionists.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

wand, But Bib does provide us with sources - which he cuts and pates to suit his own arguments.

CI: I made NO argument...just quotations from what evolutionists have published...nothing else. This was one of the purposes of this thread, as was stated in my opening post.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

cicerone,

You are probably right. I was hoping Bibliophile might give titles of books or essays rather than skewed excerpts.

The quotations give the relevant citation documentation...check it out.

If you feel it is "skewed" then debate that with the citation authors, et al.

0 Replies

sorry bib. i only looked at your last page and was familiar with mostt of the arguments. it gets boring aafter about the thousandth time where a P chemist opines aabout evolution. Thats like a mechanic telling you how to do brain surgery. Tthe living orgaanism is subject to its individual staate of entropic senescence. Lord Kelvin was responsible for the law.
Laws of thermo are not violated and the concentration of Kelvin II is more historic than operable. the organism has a " metabolic engine " of its own. An entire fersclugginer population of termites isnt increasing entropy of all the worlds termittes.

The only place that disorder increases is population dynamics as proposed by Ehrlich almost 40 years ago.

if you could summarize, "bumper sticker fashion" whaat your quottes are saying, and, do they have any relevance. Im still wondering about Capra,

Have you read Goulds "Structure of Evolutionaary Theory" ? HE has a good historical perspective of Kelvins atttacks att Huxley and Darwin.

0 Replies

I gave up on this when it became clear that Bib isn't a scientist, and has little understanding of the theory on either side.

Pop theology - annoyance without entertainment. Good luck, farmerman.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

I gave up on this when it became clear that Bib isn't a scientist, and has little understanding of the theory on either side.

Pop theology - annoyance without entertainment. Good luck, farmerman.

ehbeth: you gave up too easily, and protest too much! There is a lot more that could be posted here, but it became clear to me after QUOTE#12 that certain A2K members are not really interested in what "Evolutionists" have said or published about "what evolution teaches," moreover, they only want to hold on to what they "believe," even though it flies in the face of what some of the most ardent "evolution scientists" have taught for the last forty years!

Shame really, but there you go, that's the ever-changing, non-specific and elastic nature of the theory of evolution. That's not my opinion, that's self-evident in the quotations that I've posted here.

Oh yes, one more thing, believers and adherents of the theory of evolution don't like to be reminded that "Evolution," (depending on which school of thought you believe: saltation, hopeful monster, darwinism, neo-darwinism etc), is a divided community that has "experts" vying for each of the schools of thought.

0 Replies

Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:

..........Oh yes, one more thing, believers and adherents of the theory of evolution don't like to be reminded that "Evolution," (depending on which school of thought you believe: saltation, hopeful monster, darwinism, neo-darwinism etc), is a divided community that has "experts" vying for each of the schools of thought.

"experts" ?

[i prefer the term "which? doctors"! :wink:]

0 Replies

Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:

Einherjar wrote:
Earth is not a closed system, our solarsystem is close to being a closed system in that interactions with elements outside it are negligible.

If this is the case, as you believe it, Ein, then how did anyone ever establish the Second Law of Thermodynamics as being operable in a closed system?

From near closed systems. Wether the second law is valid for closed systems is not relevant to the discussion, wether it is valid for open systems is. This is why I have just presented you with an experiment you can easily replicate proving that it is not.

0 Replies

Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:

wandeljw wrote:
cicerone,

You are probably right. I was hoping Bibliophile might give titles of books or essays rather than skewed excerpts.

The quotations give the relevant citation documentation...check it out.

If you feel it is "skewed" then debate that with the citation authors, et al.

Bibliophile,

I apologize for using the term "skewed". A2K is our Lyceum and you are our Aristotle. Very Happy

0 Replies

Wandel: respect to you...apology accepted.

0 Replies

BoGoWo wrote:

Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:
..........Oh yes, one more thing, believers and adherents of the theory of evolution don't like to be reminded that "Evolution," (depending on which school of thought you believe: saltation, hopeful monster, darwinism, neo-darwinism etc), is a divided community that has "experts" vying for each of the schools of thought.

"experts" ?

[i prefer the term "which? doctors"! :wink:]

I hear ya, man. Hence the quotation marks. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Ein: surely the concept of "a closed system" is a theoretical one, that cannot be demonstrated on this planet? In which case, it IS relevant to the discussion of Evolution.

0 Replies

No it is not. It can easily be demonstrated bot that the second law does not apply to open systems, and that the earth is an open system.

0 Replies

Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know