THE END OF EVOLUTION?

Or any living thing.(Goddidit?)OK, how about a snowflake or a hurricane? Or a crystal? A stalagmite/stalactite?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

quote:

---

Maybe I've lost the thread of the discussion and am misinterpreting what you're trying to say, but information theory and 2LOT have much in common. The tendency of noise to interfere with communication is not that much different conceptually from the distribution of energy tending to even out over time.

---

Information Theory includes a concept called entropy (because of a mathematical similarity to one measure of thermodynamic entropy). However that entropy is essentially a measure of information in the message.Also, the concept of noise interfering with the message has some relevance to evolution but it must be remembered that it treats all mutations (except "silent" mutations, perhaps) as noise, making no distinction between beneficial and detrimental. It certainly isn't what Lucy's argument needs.

Cavediver, what can I say? Um..You're a dick head. You claim to be a physicist...but I realized how stupid you were when you claimed, with authority in a previous thread, that mass increases with velocity.A snowflake contains no inherited information. It forms according to its environment when the conditions are right. This has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.Please just stay out of this thread. Your input, from my experience, is like a cancer; it, like the 2ndLTD, destroys discussion. Just ignore my stupidity and allow me to make an arse out of myself, that's my right. I'm trying to apply the 2nd law to the human genome.
Don't worry about what talk.origins say. We're more sophisticated than them.Take a photocopy for example. It's not exact. That's not good enough for communication or for reproduction of living systems. The next copy is tending toward equilibrium, it destroys information. In computer science we deal with it by checking the information against a polynomial remainder, the more sophisticated the polynomial, the greater the chance of reproducing the original signal, or intended information. G'day bluejay, and what a beautiful example your avatar is of organization. One says that evolution is accelerating and one says that evolution has basically stopped.They're at odds. Yeh PaulK, that's me doing that, that's what this thread is about. Thanks Percy, it's not an easy task to apply this concept. But it is necessary for our understanding of life. Thanks WK, exactly the issue here. Firstly Percy, you don't know my mind. But in response to your post natural laws are information. Thanks sfs. Nothing defies the 2nd LOT .A program (information) uses it. There is information (organization) in the genetic program. Natural processes.Edited by LucyTheApe, : No reason given.Edited by LucyTheApe, : No reason given.Edited by LucyTheApe, : No reason given.

---

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything. blz paskal

Uh, sorry, you're wrong. Mass does increase with velocity, though it's not too noticable until velocity is approaching the speed of light. Mass in special relativity - WikipediaWhen it comes to physics, you should listen to cavedweller, because you have demonstrated your own ignorance of the subject.

Not the issue here dwise but you're wrong. If you want to discuss this issue with me and CD then start a new thread.

---

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything. blz paskal

I didn't claim to know your mind. I can only go by what you post to this forum, and on that basis it is apparent that you don't understand most of what others are posting. What you say next is a case in point: My post said that all matter must obey the laws of our universe, and the fact that some of this matter possesses intelligence cannot overcome those laws. Your response is a non sequitur.--Percy

oh boy, we got a live one. Unbelievably off-topic, but I do not make "claims" in this area, as anyone at EvC with more than a scraping of neural matter appreciates. Out of interest, to which type of 'mass' are you referring? I may be wrong, but I will pay 200 GBP to AIDS research if you can find anywhere at EvC I have ever said that "mass increases with velocity" without qualification of what I meant by "mass". But I do appreciate that this is all probably a bit beyond you, so please feel free to ignore the challenge back to the topic: No? So the informational structure of the water molecule is not inherited into the structure of the snowflake? Really? Oh, you are so close... so close to understanding, but your "stupidity" prevents you from seeing. Where do you think the information in the genome has come from? You think it is any different to the snowflake? Hmmm - chemical composition + environment... A powerful combination. On the contrary, it has EVERYTHING to do with what you are talking about. The fact that you don't see it simply demonstrates your inability to understand the subject. But evolution is "magic", right? Ooh, do I have so much of an impact? Wow, I'm impressed. I guess my belittling in the face of abject idiocy is far more worthwhile than I would have ever credited. You have certainly enacted your right enough times, and I am exercising my right to not ignore it. Where's the fun in someone making an arse out of themselves if I'm not there to heckle

quote:

---

Cavediver, what can I say? Um..You're a dick head. You claim to be a physicist...but I realized how stupid you were when you claimed, with authority in a previous thread, that mass increases with velocity.

---

So Cavediver is as stupid as Albert Einstein ?

quote:

---

I'm trying to apply the 2nd law to the human genome.

---

So when do you intend to start doing that ? I don't see any mention of the chemistry anywhere in your post.

quote:

---

Yeh PaulK, that's me doing that, that's what this thread is about.

---

So where's the connection ? Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

If you promise to give $200 to the nearest high school maths teacher, I'll dig it out. That's assuming order Percy, we're not there yet.

---

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything. blz paskal

You're talking to one So that would be a bit pointless... though I don't get paid to do it any more, so the cash would come in handy

Lucy,you forgot one of the most important part of the quote which is: The end of the quote,as you will notice, changes greatly the sense of the phrase. While you could easily find what is described in the former quote, you couldn't find what is described in the latter quote. That's why what you just did is called QUOTE MINE lucytheape.

If you agree that entropy can be applied to the human genome we can move on.

quote:

---

If you agree that entropy can be applied to the human genome we can move on.

---

If you mean thermodynamic entropy then of course it can. But you are going to have to get deeply into the chemistry to get anywhere with it.

"We're not there yet?" That's an answer?No one can force you to make sense or to respond meaningfully. What we are seeing here is you becoming increasingly obscure and ambiguous as your unfamiliarity with the subject matter becomes more obvious.As near as I can make out, the arguments you're offering here are your best attempt to reproduce standard creationist positions that you don't really understand but that you trust to be correct. Your trust is misplaced. Keep in mind that if there were really any thermodynamic problems in evolutionary theory the chemists and physicists would long ago have called it to the attention of biologists.The requirement of Biblical inerrancy blinds creationists to the real evidence because evidence is accepted or rejected on the basis of its consistency with literally interpreted Biblical accounts instead of with the real world. Scientific theories describe the real world, not Bible myths, so as long as Biblical inerrancy is given the highest priority then creationists are doomed to continue pushing ideas that are contradicted by the real world.Anyway, this is a plea for you to begin trying to build an understanding of the topic so that you can start making sense and begin engaging the discussion.--Percy

How many times must you be shown that that the 2nd law has no bearing on the human genome, evolution or the outcome of the NCAA basketball playoffs. For starters the human genome is not a closed system.This is like hitting my head against the wall. Do you read anything people post? Do you follow any of the links written by people much smarter than you or I?If you have issues with what is said at talkorigins, then show how it is wrong and how your definition, which goes against ALL previous understanding of the laws of thermodynamics, is correct.If you can't then drop this assinine assertions that the 2ndLOT has anything to do with evolution.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts