Question About Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-04-2011, 04:17 PM
 
RE: Question About Evolution
One difficulty I run in with discussions with creationists is their insistence of entropy. Stating that genes cannot ever create new structures. Its pretty cut and dry Answers in Genesis stuff. Ive tried in general with people and it gets pretty much no where.

For instance the work of the Linski group is met with a cushioning of retorts from conservapedia and AiG. After you while you just have to let it go, every time you refute something and ask that they look at the actual data and work for things they keep running back and throw the exact same argument you discounted only a few moments ago right around again.
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2011, 05:08 PM
RE: Question About Evolution
You will occasionally run into people like that. It's hard to tell if they are trolling you, or if they are as stupid as they seem. Arguments of entropy are arguments that I myself don't find it to difficult to counter. It's easy once you realize that they are all founded on one of two things, ignorance or lying. To put it in another way they are either intentionally lying or to misinformed to know that they are lying.

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2011, 07:30 PM
RE: Question About Evolution
As I've said a few other times, my math teacher is a creationist so I often times get into discussions with him.
The main points hes made for why he doesn't 'believe' in evolutionism is that
- random mutations should cause chaos, instead there seems to be order.
- humans behave/think differently than monkeys/animals.
- how does it happen? nobody knows.

Usually the answers come to me after I've left the class, but what do you guys/gals have to say on it?

Hey brother christian, with your high and mighty errand, your actions speak so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.

"This machine kills fascists..."

"Well this machine kills commies!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2011, 08:16 PM
 
RE: Question About Evolution
"random mutations should cause chaos, instead there seems to be order."
Random mutations DO cause chaos, in an unscientific use of the word. Organisms do die because of mutations and they do suffer. The "order" that arises is product of natural selection.

"Humans behave/think differently"
Not that much. Humans are much more intelligent, sure, but we share a lot of basic behaviors with animals. For example, we masturbate and have sex when we don't need to (Primates and dolphins). We can be territorial for no reason. We are protective of our offspring.

Also, tell him to watch video clips of monkeys, especially the gibbon, and ask him if it doesn't remind him of a human child.

"How does it happen? Nobody knows" -? Yes we do. We don't know how exactly the first life form came about, but we know how evolution works completely.
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2011, 09:28 PM
 
RE: Question About Evolution
These are the types of articles I have to do work to defend against.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/e...amics.html

They are slickly presented and sound very convincing, especially to non scientists who happily want to believe and can grasp on the buzz words and phrases unleashed on there.

this one is a fun read too

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...in-the-eye

Again since I dont have a classroom or lab or anything to show to refute other than my words others whom participate and are Christian simply refuse on any level to understand what I'm saying.
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2011, 10:45 PM
RE: Question About Evolution
(12-04-2011 09:28 PM)lazarian Wrote:  These are the types of articles I have to do work to defend against.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html
"Also, the Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance."
Aaaahaahahaaaaa!!! Seriously? Circular anyone?
Now I don't know a lot about chemistry, but I'm not some things can't even pass under MY radar. This for example:
"Carbon-14 is made when cosmic rays knock neutrons out of atomic nuclei in the upper atmosphere. These displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14N) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14C. Unlike common carbon (12C), 14C is unstable and slowly decays, changing it back to nitrogen and releasing energy. This instability makes it radioactive."
This is not even something they have to lie about. My guess is that they where trying to be factual, but where to stupid to use wikipedia
(12-04-2011 09:28 PM)lazarian Wrote:  http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/e...amics.html
Damn that second law argument! First of all, the second law applies to closed systems! who ever claimed the planet was a closed system? Bunk says I. And of course mutations would lead to entropy. IF the process was unguided. Which of course it isn't. That's where the "by means of natural selection part comes in.
(12-04-2011 09:28 PM)lazarian Wrote:  They are slickly presented and sound very convincing, especially to non scientists who happily want to believe and can grasp on the buzz words and phrases unleashed on there.

this one is a fun read too

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...in-the-eye

Again since I dont have a classroom or lab or anything to show to refute other than my words others whom participate and are Christian simply refuse on any level to understand what I'm saying.

It is interesting to see that they are willing to completely discard Lenskis on conclutions on a 20 year (!) experiment and simply change the wording so that it fits better with their agenda. Yup. In case you haven't heard, thats the way science is done from now on. No more looking at the data and assessing the available logic explanations. Nope, from now on we shall look at the results and mold them to fit what we like. Did you read the part of the article where it said they where going to repeat his experiment to uncover the mistakes they think he's made? Nope, that's right, you didn't Because THEY ARE NOT GOING TO! They are simply to daft to pull it of! Aaargh! I can't believe that they can actually make me this pissed when I'm not even drunk!
I'm sorry. I'm ranting. But these people make me so angry I can't even think in whole sentences!

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2011, 09:11 AM
 
RE: Question About Evolution
The difficulty arises when you try to point something out they use these articles as a guide and indeed its very circular. No matter how much you press or attempt to get them to understand the science it goes back to here. Sadly we are just left with making our points and moving on.
Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2011, 10:36 AM
RE: Question About Evolution
About the second law:

"Even death is a manifestation of this law. "
That is soooo false. We do not die because our body's molecules decay spontaneously

"everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time. Material things are not eternal. Everything appears to change eventually, and chaos increases. Nothing stays as fresh as the day one buys it; clothing becomes faded, threadbare, and ultimately returns to dust"

This is a typical over-thinking of the second law. Stuff rot because of chemical causes, clothes fade because you wash them, and no, nothing will ever become dust (are these guys advocating alchemy?) just because you don't look at it.

"In more understandable terms, this law observes the fact that the useable energy in the universe is becoming less and less. Ultimately there would be no available energy left."
What the hell is "usable energy"? Also energy never becomes more or less.

This article does not define "complex" in a physical sense so I will: the more complex a thing is the more energy was needed to make it's structure. A DNA molecule is complex not because it's hard to draw (intentional definition of complex) but because it stores much energy. It is also important to mention that once complex molecules are formed, the complexity doesn't grow just because bigger and bigger animals arise. Our body is not necessarily more complex than a bee's since the molecules that make it are equally complex, we merely have more of them.

"Compare a living plant with a dead one. Can the simple addition of energy make a completely dead plant live?

Who said it can? Evolution doesn't work like that. Zombies do.

"If there is actually a powerful Evolutionary force at work in the universe, and if the open system of Earth makes all the difference, why does the Sun's energy not make a truly dead plant become alive again (assuming a sufficient supply of water, light, and the like)?"

Because the difference between a dead and a living plant is not energy. It's structural changes. Organisms doesn't die because they run out of energy.

Telenomy: Bullshit that is made up by desperate believers to support their nonsense.

"What is the difference then between a stick, which is dead, and an orchid which is alive?

A living one has water in it a dead one doesn't. The "machine which is capturing energy to increase order" is the photosynthesis which occur in the leaves not in branches.

"information which does not reside in the atoms and molecules" Yes it does. It's called DNA and RNA.

The whole thing sticks with the theist logic: Here are the claims we want to prove now let's see how can facts be twisted so that they will fit into our pathetic ideal made up micro cosmos of ours.

..."we can be truly free - not because we can rebel against the the tyranny of the selfish replicators but because we know that there is no one to rebel."
Susan Blackmore : The Meme Machine
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: