Science Disproves Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-08-2012, 02:09 PM (This post was last modified: 28-08-2012 02:24 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 09:23 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 09:07 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  max planck (distribution of energy)

Apparently you dont read!

http://www.chemteam.info/Chem-History/Pl...-1901.html

i know ive posted it here, but just so people can read FOR THEMSELVES.

Entropy is the thermodynamic property toward equilibrium/average/homogenization/dissipation: hotter, more dynamic areas of a system lose heat/energy while cooler areas (e.g., space) get warmer / gain energy; molecules of a solvent or gas tend to evenly distribute; material objects wear out; organisms die; the universe is cooling down.


I'm sorry but it seems like you are using the fallacy of special pleading to prove a point.

In addition your use of ad hominems or not needed.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2012, 02:22 PM (This post was last modified: 28-08-2012 02:35 PM by FSM_scot.)
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 07:29 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  but the process, at the molecular level, aint as different as you think.

Here is something to assist..

http://baharna.com/philos/life.htm

There may be some similarity at a molecular level. That doesn't change that fact that a flame is NOT life.
Something having similarity's with something else, doesn't mean it is the same thing.

(28-08-2012 07:29 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  Your last claim on the flame, was not me being an idiot!

Well yeah it was. You make out that A flame is life.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes FSM_scot's post
28-08-2012, 06:48 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 02:09 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 09:23 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  http://www.chemteam.info/Chem-History/Pl...-1901.html

i know ive posted it here, but just so people can read FOR THEMSELVES.

Entropy is the thermodynamic property toward equilibrium/average/homogenization/dissipation: hotter, more dynamic areas of a system lose heat/energy while cooler areas (e.g., space) get warmer / gain energy; molecules of a solvent or gas tend to evenly distribute; material objects wear out; organisms die; the universe is cooling down.

can you represent what 'hot' is of the forces of nature?

what is it, that makes an atom hot?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2012, 06:53 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 06:48 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 02:09 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Entropy is the thermodynamic property toward equilibrium/average/homogenization/dissipation: hotter, more dynamic areas of a system lose heat/energy while cooler areas (e.g., space) get warmer / gain energy; molecules of a solvent or gas tend to evenly distribute; material objects wear out; organisms die; the universe is cooling down.

can you represent what 'hot' is of the forces of nature?

what is it, that makes an atom hot?

motion

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
28-08-2012, 06:55 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 02:22 PM)FSM_scot Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 07:29 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  but the process, at the molecular level, aint as different as you think.

Here is something to assist..

http://baharna.com/philos/life.htm

There may be some similarity at a molecular level.
some similarity?

what is different, other than the elements themselves of an oxidation of a fire or the oxidation of a kreb (citrus) cylce?

why is one process to the molecular level different than the other?

do you think 'god' is holding the lighter for a life to complete its oxidation?

Perhaps fire is not using elements and people do, or is it the other way around?

Quote:That doesn't change that fact that a flame is NOT life.

to you a life is ONLY what is defined as being a alive.

But you have no idea, what the process of life, to the molecular level is.

Quote:Something having similarity's with something else, doesn't mean it is the same thing.

i know.

For example: there are lots of human beings but few with the same level of integrity!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bishadi's post
28-08-2012, 06:58 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 06:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 06:48 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  can you represent what 'hot' is of the forces of nature?

what is it, that makes an atom hot?

motion

motion is that'?

what is causing the motion?

is there a direction of that motion (vector) or are you talking about the resonant of the em, causing it to 'move'? For example: is the HOT piece of iron, sitting next to a cold one, in motion?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2012, 08:17 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 06:58 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 06:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  motion

motion is that'?

what is causing the motion?

is there a direction of that motion (vector) or are you talking about the resonant of the em, causing it to 'move'? For example: is the HOT piece of iron, sitting next to a cold one, in motion?

Heat is simply the kinetic energy of the atoms.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
28-08-2012, 08:23 PM (This post was last modified: 28-08-2012 08:36 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 08:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 06:58 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  motion is that'?

what is causing the motion?

is there a direction of that motion (vector) or are you talking about the resonant of the em, causing it to 'move'? For example: is the HOT piece of iron, sitting next to a cold one, in motion?

Heat is simply the kinetic energy of the atoms.

Heat in thermal energy

I found this rather interesting, perhaps it'll help out Bishadi.


Quote:Microscopically, the thermal energy is partly the kinetic energy of a system's constituent particles, which may be atoms, molecules, electrons, or particles in plasmas. It originates from the individually random, or disordered, motion of particles in a large ensemble. In ideal monatomic gases, thermal energy is entirely kinetic energy. In other substances in cases where some of thermal energy is stored in atomic vibration, this vibrational part of the thermal energy is stored equally partitioned between potential energy of atomic vibration, and kinetic energy of atomic vibration. Thermal energy is thus equally partitioned between all available quadratic degrees of freedom of the particles. As noted, these degrees of freedom may include pure translational motion in gases, in rotational states, and as potential and kinetic energy in normal modes of vibrations in intermolecular or crystal lattice vibrations. In general, due to quantum mechanical reasons, the availability of any such degrees of freedom is a function of the energy in the system, and therefore depends on the temperature (see heat capacity for discussion of this phenomenon).

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2012, 06:44 AM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(28-08-2012 08:23 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(28-08-2012 08:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  Heat is simply the kinetic energy of the atoms.

Heat in thermal energy

I found this rather interesting, perhaps it'll help out Bishadi.

it did, it shares how WRONG the model it.

A microwave is not adding 'speed' (kinetic energy) to food.


Quote:Microscopically, the thermal energy is partly the kinetic energy of a system's constituent particles, which may be atoms, molecules, electrons, or particles in plasmas. It originates from the individually random, or disordered, motion of particles in a large ensemble. In ideal monatomic gases, thermal energy is entirely kinetic energy. In other substances in cases where some of thermal energy is stored in atomic vibration, this vibrational part of the thermal energy is stored equally partitioned between potential energy of atomic vibration, and kinetic energy of atomic vibration. Thermal energy is thus equally partitioned between all available quadratic degrees of freedom of the particles. As noted, these degrees of freedom may include pure translational motion in gases, in rotational states, and as potential and kinetic energy in normal modes of vibrations in intermolecular or crystal lattice vibrations. In general, due to quantum mechanical reasons, the availability of any such degrees of freedom is a function of the energy in the system, and therefore depends on the temperature (see heat capacity for discussion of this phenomenon).
[/quote]



See what i mean, that definition of energy being the 'speed' of its particles is like making a steam engine in a day of the photo electric effect.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2012, 10:22 AM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
Vibrational energy is what generates heat. Thanks to Einstein we know that energy (E) is equal to mass (m) times the speed of light © squared, ergo E=mc^2. So mass and energy are intimately related as basically the same thing.

You continue to assert arguments based on life existing at the molecular level and chastised someone else by saying that they define life as something that is alive. Hogwash. Life is a self-replicating package of matter and energy capable of reproduction. Numerous natural sources of matter and energy may form self-replicating patterns, but these patterns themselves are not capable of reproducing themselves. The patterns can be reproduced by other external forces, such as the melting of rock into magma and the crystallazation of the same suite of minerals as the original rock had, but that does not allow them to meet the definition of life. This is also why most biologists tend to not include viruses as life since they cannot replicate themselves without help from an external cell.

Meaning, life can't exist lower than the cellular level as the cell performs the basic functions necessary for replication and reproduction. This is the same argument I would use for defining an element. An element is the smallest subdivision of matter that retains all of the unique chemical and physical attributes of that element. So, despite the fact that we know that the element is comprised of atoms that are comprised of smaller particles, they are not elements because they do not retain the unique characteristics necessary to meet the definition of an element.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: