Science Disproves Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2012, 03:50 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
Heat is entropy. And what's this em shit? What does typography have to do with physics?

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 03:54 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 07:12 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 07:00 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, heat is kinetic energy.
you like to use the words and watch yourself repeat what is accepted.

why not go read the babble

gen 3:22 And Jehovah God saith, `Lo, the man was as one of Us, as to the knowledge of good and evil; and now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age,' --



as it seems, to understand how and why, is irrelevant to the forum know it all.

ie...... if you have 2 iron ATOMS (single), one is hot, one is not.

What is it UPON THAT MASS, causing 'hot'?

Speed is not a force of nature!

ie...motion is not 'energy' itself

Idiots dont have a 5th force to nature. (speed)


the stupidity of the current paradigm is that energy is defined as a potential difference (speed) between points, when the energy of the structure is the em, in one form or another (all cases).


again, the reason you and i dont get along, is you are one the 'complacent' to the existing model, just like a religious wingnut is to theology.

F = MA

Things in motion stay in motion.
That's all ya need.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 03:59 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 03:42 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 07:00 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, heat is kinetic energy.

This energy, when dispersed as molecular vibration in solids and liquids (i.e., as both potential energy and kinetic energy of atoms), is heat.

and that gentlement (and ladies of course) is why we have 17billion dollar spinners (accellerators), that are the single greatest waste of resource, next to military on the earth.

when you wake up to realize what the 'heat' of an atom is, you'll know what i mean.

until then, perhaps go share sandwich ideas with the peanut gallery.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 04:00 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 03:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 07:12 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  you like to use the words and watch yourself repeat what is accepted.

why not go read the babble

gen 3:22 And Jehovah God saith, `Lo, the man was as one of Us, as to the knowledge of good and evil; and now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age,' --



as it seems, to understand how and why, is irrelevant to the forum know it all.

ie...... if you have 2 iron ATOMS (single), one is hot, one is not.

What is it UPON THAT MASS, causing 'hot'?

Speed is not a force of nature!

ie...motion is not 'energy' itself

Idiots dont have a 5th force to nature. (speed)


the stupidity of the current paradigm is that energy is defined as a potential difference (speed) between points, when the energy of the structure is the em, in one form or another (all cases).


again, the reason you and i dont get along, is you are one the 'complacent' to the existing model, just like a religious wingnut is to theology.

F = MA

Things in motion stay in motion.
That's all ya need.

so if you are big banging, nothing would have ever come back!

ah dah!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 04:02 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 03:59 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 03:42 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  This energy, when dispersed as molecular vibration in solids and liquids (i.e., as both potential energy and kinetic energy of atoms), is heat.

and that gentlement (and ladies of course) is why we have 17billion dollar spinners (accellerators), that are the single greatest waste of resource, next to military on the earth.

when you wake up to realize what the 'heat' of an atom is, you'll know what i mean.

until then, perhaps go share sandwich ideas with the peanut gallery.

Well, I'll stay with this definition until someone clearly and logically explains an alternative, backed up with evidence. Haven't seen that.

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
30-08-2012, 04:06 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 03:50 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Heat is entropy.
from the steam engine era.


This is our generation. For example:

Quote: And what's this em shit?
electromagnetic (electric and magnetic fields in perpendicular planes), some call it light (hugenormous (technical term) spectrum).

'fields' of ALL charge are em (all cases)

what do you think is causing the motion, magic?


Quote:What does typography have to do with physics?

Try, applying what YOU can do in nature, to be of natures capacity.

For example: if you were an electric circuit of potential difference, a magnet could be used to stop your heart, brain, nervous system, etc. ie... to apply YOURSelf to the comprehension of nature, you will find, you aint living on 'hot' nor potential difference, like loaded springs.

the use of WORDS is how knowledge evolves (that maybe a bit to technical for a steam engine kind of guy)

"WE" put mass on the moon, with the use of WORDS.

Rocks dont do that, but its a capability, within nature, either way!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 04:07 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 04:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 03:59 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  and that gentlement (and ladies of course) is why we have 17billion dollar spinners (accellerators), that are the single greatest waste of resource, next to military on the earth.

when you wake up to realize what the 'heat' of an atom is, you'll know what i mean.

until then, perhaps go share sandwich ideas with the peanut gallery.

Well, I'll stay with this definition until someone clearly and logically explains an alternative, backed up with evidence. Haven't seen that.

When the atoms wiggle, they have kinetic energy because they are moving. They also have potential energy because the spacing between the atoms is changing as they wiggle; as you stretch or squeeze the distance, you store potential energy just like when you stretch or squeeze a spring.

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
30-08-2012, 04:08 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 04:06 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 03:50 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Heat is entropy.
from the steam engine era.


This is our generation. For example:

Quote: And what's this em shit?
electromagnetic (electric and magnetic fields in perpendicular planes), some call it light (hugenormous (technical term) spectrum).

'fields' of ALL charge are em (all cases)

what do you think is causing the motion, magic?


Quote:What does typography have to do with physics?

Try, applying what YOU can do in nature, to be of natures capacity.

For example: if you were an electric circuit of potential difference, a magnet could be used to stop your heart, brain, nervous system, etc. ie... to apply YOURSelf to the comprehension of nature, you will find, you aint living on 'hot' nor potential difference, like loaded springs.

At either rate it follows that life and evolution do not violate the second law of thermodynamics, nor does it violate entropy.

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
30-08-2012, 04:12 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 04:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 03:59 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  and that gentlement (and ladies of course) is why we have 17billion dollar spinners (accellerators), that are the single greatest waste of resource, next to military on the earth.

when you wake up to realize what the 'heat' of an atom is, you'll know what i mean.

until then, perhaps go share sandwich ideas with the peanut gallery.

Well, I'll stay with this definition until someone clearly and logically explains an alternative, backed up with evidence. Haven't seen that.

what evidence is greater than YOU witnessing for own dam self?

Do you actually believe that the existing paradigm is correct?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 04:15 PM
RE: Science Disproves Evolution
(30-08-2012 04:08 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 04:06 PM)Bishadi Wrote:  from the steam engine era.


This is our generation. For example:

electromagnetic (electric and magnetic fields in perpendicular planes), some call it light (hugenormous (technical term) spectrum).

'fields' of ALL charge are em (all cases)

what do you think is causing the motion, magic?



Try, applying what YOU can do in nature, to be of natures capacity.

For example: if you were an electric circuit of potential difference, a magnet could be used to stop your heart, brain, nervous system, etc. ie... to apply YOURSelf to the comprehension of nature, you will find, you aint living on 'hot' nor potential difference, like loaded springs.

At either rate it follows that life and evolution do not violate the second law of thermodynamics, nor does it violate entropy.

And that is a bonafide, stupid claim.

if is like repeating john 3:16 to a whole other group of complacent idiots.

Open a thread, and state the 1st and second law.

When you read the first law, notice a term 'conserved', then read the second and find the the first makes the second 'moot'.

Reason: what caused both the potential difference and then was causes the change of state (reduction).

the 2nd imposes a direction, with ZERO reason, evidence or cause. Just the acceptance of morons that havent realized how stupid it is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: