Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[JM2C]

So there is no reason to think that the Behemoth was a dinosaur.

The word Behemoth came first then the modern word dinosaur.

 

[JM2C]

You laugh off the concept of evolution and adaptation without ever considering how normal it is. This is why I made the quick and simple post about how things which you can observe today are simply microcosms of the greater story of life.

Molecules can combine to form more complex molecules.
Complex molecules can chemically form polymers.
Polymers go onto form polypeptide bonds and produce all sorts of different proteins and amino acids.
Certain amino acids form nucleobases which are the basis for RNA & DNA.
RNA & DNA create and transfer everything.
Humans are large baskets of DNA & RNA - which all came from simple molecules...

You were conceived and developed in your mother's womb using the exact same process.
This is just stuff that you should've learned in chemistry and biology back in Middle School.

So simply by observing things which happen in labs and in nature every single day, you can see how the "molecules to man" argument isn't just some wild *** guess.

Just imagine this: from a non-life molecule to a cell to a well-organized and complex 100 trillion living cells with information in a man that took millions or billions of years to developed and did not encounter any disorder at all is really amazing.

Huh? Things don't become more orderly and complex as we age. Things break down as we age...

Entropy -Entropy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

”Things don’t become more orderly and complex as we age” There is only one meaning to this and that is, disorder and chaos or things die, but from billions of years to the present time we see this amazing organized self-sustaining complex of integrated machinery called the cell in the tens of trillions in a man without encountering disorder and chaos. That is truly amazing.

Huh? Things don't become more orderly and complex as we age. Things break down as we age...

And then you said this:

A single dead cell reproduced itself into multiple single living cells before it died, didn't it? Just like your children will live well past your death, so too do individual cells have offspring which live well past their parent's deaths.

No branch of science can testify that “a single dead cell reproduce itself into multiple single living cells”. It’s against the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

And you all gave me negative remarks with no explanation at all. Like you guys know what you’re saying.

And this was your answer:

.....Do you know what the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is related to? If you did, you'd realize your here question is kind of dumb.

Didn’t you post Entropy from wiki?

Entropy -Entropy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It’s like you telling me to read entropy. What was in your mind when you posted this link? Were you referring it to the 2nd LoT?

The 2nd law of thermodynamics refers to waste heat in closed mechanical systems, not to organisms. Maybe look it up and read it.

Bunyip was saying that “The 2nd law of thermodynamics refers to waste heat” or energy. What does he mean by “waste heat”?

“Physicists attempting to transform heat into work with full efficacy quickly learned that always some heat would escape into the surrounding environment, eternally doomed to be wasted energy. Being obsolete, this energy can never be converted into anything useful again.” In reference to the 2nd LoT.

So, if a waste energy can never be converted into anything useful again according to the 2nd LoT, is it possible that a waste or dead cell can be converted again into a living cell base on the principle of the 2nd LoT?

According to you: YES!

A single dead cell reproduced itself into multiple single living cells before it died, didn't it?

But I said:

No branch of science can testify that “a single dead cell reproduce itself into multiple single living cells”. It’s against the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

And you all laughed!

 

[Revoltingest]

Entropy is nature and cannot be controlled by anything other than the nature itself. The only thing that can control entropy is the 3rd LoT or the Absolute Zero (0° K) which is unattainable or impossible.

Let’s be clear here. Increase in entropy is disorder and chaos. Decrease in entropy is order and complex.

You are saying the sun is increasing entropy, i.e., disorder and chaos, and at the same time it offsets or equalize to decrease entropy, i.e., order and complex. You have a very good point here, it gives or sustains life, but if we apply the 2nd LoT in all of these, the life that it gives also dies and cannot live again or produce life again. IOW, no non-living things can produce life base on the principle of the 2nd LoT. It’s not going to happen and this is what abiogenesis/evolutionist been teaching ever since.

This is to misunderstand how thermodynamics works.
Some points....
- The laws of thermodynamics don't preclude abiogenesis, which is simply one kind of chemical reaction.
- The Earth & its environs are not closed systems, so entropy needn't increase.
- Even in a closed system experiencing increased entropy, local conditions may have decreasing entropy.

Entropy is better understood in terms of energy & its availability. Order & disorder require a
much greater technical understanding, which is why they're so often misunderstood & misapplied.

 

[JM2C]

At times it is easier just to provide something people can read away from the thread which has more details than a forum thread supports.

We are here to debate and not insult each other. If I’m wrong correct me, but that doesn’t mean you are right when you’re correcting me. We could trade insults all day long, but at the end of the day we can ask ourselves, did I learn something today?

 

[Parsimony]

Entropy is nature and cannot be controlled by anything other than the nature itself. The only thing that can control entropy is the 3rd LoT or the Absolute Zero (0° K) which is unattainable or impossible.

Your freezer is controlling entropy right now: reducing it locally so that water freezes into ice cubes.

Let’s be clear here. Increase in entropy is disorder and chaos. Decrease in entropy is order and complex.

You are saying the sun is increasing entropy, i.e., disorder and chaos, and at the same time it offsets or equalize to decrease entropy, i.e., order and complex. You have a very good point here, it gives or sustains life, but if we apply the 2nd LoT in all of these, the life that it gives also dies and cannot live again or produce life again. IOW, no non-living things can produce life base on the principle of the 2nd LoT. It’s not going to happen and this is what abiogenesis/evolutionist been teaching ever since.

In some sense, life does indeed come from non-life even today. You eat dead things all the time and your metabolism is able to convert that non-living matter into new living cells. The energy required to do that ultimately comes from the Sun.

The word Behemoth came first then the modern word dinosaur.

Relevance?

 

[JM2C]

This is to misunderstand how thermodynamics works.

Some points....

- The laws of thermodynamics don't preclude abiogenesis, which is simply one kind of chemical reaction.

- The Earth & its environs are not closed systems, so entropy needn't increase.

- Even in a closed system experiencing increased entropy, local conditions may have decreasing entropy.


Entropy is better understood in terms of energy & its availability. Order & disorder require a

much greater technical understanding, which is why they're so often misunderstood & misapplied.

How was the 1st, 2nd and 3rd LoT discovered and where did they apply this first?

 

[gnostic]

We are here to debate and not insult each other. If I’m wrong correct me, but that doesn’t mean you are right when you’re correcting me. We could trade insults all day long, but at the end of the day we can ask ourselves, did I learn something today?

No, no one can correct you if you are too stubborn to learn from your mistakes.

You have been corrected by a number of people here, time and time again, every time you make one of your wildly ignorant claims, but you don't seem to care how little you know.

You clearly don't have the even basic education in science, because so far I have read post after post, that you don't want to learn but make up things that you have no understanding in.

Any ignorant person can learn, if they are willing to be corrected. But you are too stubborn to learn, especially when you personal belief or personal opinion is challenged or questioned.

But that the worse of your problems, you are not honest person, by the way you have twisted not only credible science, you cannot even honestly even present biblical verses without twisting its context.

Correcting you is a waste of time.

 

[gnostic]

How was the 1st, 2nd and 3rd LoT discovered and where did they apply this first?

What's the point in asking question about thermodynamics, when you have already shown that you are willing to misrepresent whatever replies you are given?

 

[JM2C]

Your freezer is controlling entropy right now: reducing it locally so that water freezes into ice cubes.

Absolute Zero (0° K) is –273.15°C or –459.67°F.

Based on the 2nd LoT the fridge was invented doing the reverse process. Can we live inside the fridge all the time to preserve life?

In some sense, life does indeed come from non-life even today. You eat dead things all the time and your metabolism is able to convert that non-living matter into new living cells. The energy required to do that ultimately comes from the Sun.

Can you give me example of non-living things that you eat that don’t make you sick?

Relevance?

What if someone said it’s a behemoth in the beginning, instead of a dinosaur, when they found the dinosaur, then you would agree that the behemoth are the dinosaurs we found today.

 

[JM2C]

No, no one can correct you if you are too stubborn to learn from your mistakes.


You have been corrected by a number of people here, time and time again, every time you make one of your wildly ignorant claims, but you don't seem to care how little you know.


You clearly don't have the even basic education in science, because so far I have read post after post, that you don't want to learn but make up things that you have no understanding in.


Any ignorant person can learn, if they are willing to be corrected. But you are too stubborn to learn, especially when you personal belief or personal opinion is challenged or questioned.


But that the worse of your problems, you are not honest person, by the way you have twisted not only credible science, you cannot even honestly even present biblical verses without twisting its context.


Correcting you is a waste of time.

We call it a debate otherwise we won't be here at all. If what you’re saying is the only truth then you have to sustain this with a better argument without insulting your opponent. Can you do that?

No you can’t because you don’t know how to do it.

When I make a comment that does not agree with you, you call it, uneducated, ignorant, stubborn to learn and so on. Should I just stop because you don’t agree with me?

Then who you gonna debate then?

Have you ever thought of that?

We might as well talk about baking cookies if you don’t want people to disagree with you.

 

[JM2C]

What's the point in asking question about thermodynamics, when you have already shown that you are willing to misrepresent whatever replies you are given?

That is actually the point. Asking! If you know the answer, then let’s hear it. We are here to learn. If you can explain this to me, the differences between the 3 of them, then I will agree that you know what you’re talking about.

 

[Revoltingest]

How was the 1st, 2nd and 3rd LoT discovered and where did they apply this first?

Thermodynamics has a long history, but the real fun began with trying to understand & improve steam engine efficiency.
Here is a brief summary.....
History of thermodynamics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[McBell]

Just imagine this: from a non-life molecule to a cell to a well-organized and complex 100 trillion living cells with information in a man that took millions or billions of years to developed and did not encounter any disorder at all is really amazing. ”Things don’t become more orderly and complex as we age” There is only one meaning to this and that is, disorder and chaos or things die, but from billions of years to the present time we see this amazing organized self-sustaining complex of integrated machinery called the cell in the tens of trillions in a man without encountering disorder and chaos. That is truly amazing.

Not nearly as amazing as your repeating this same nonsense over and over and expecting to be taken seriously.

 

[McBell]

That is actually the point. Asking! If you know the answer, then let’s hear it. We are here to learn. If you can explain this to me, the differences between the 3 of them, then I will agree that you know what you’re talking about.

Yet you have shown you are not the least bit interested in learning about evolution.

If you were, you would stop beating up on the strawmen you call "evolution".

 

[McBell]

Can you give me example of non-living things that you eat that don’t make you sick?

The steak I ate last night for dinner.

 

[JM2C]

Then God is an idiot, if he did exist.

You were debating the other guy about the “6 creative days” and you quoted the bible correctly. This is really confusing to me. You based your argument from the bible, but you are not sure if God do exist?

The bible frequently used similes.

When comparing one object describing and comparing another object that is unrelated to the first object.

Using similes is what make writings "creative", and that's wonderful, except that such descriptions are never (or are rarely) accurate.

Job (the book, not the chief character in this book) is only describing the tail bending like that of cedar, but originally in your reply to me, you claim that it is like the height or size of dinosaur.

this is your post

Dinosaurs, seriously?

I just wish they still have facepalm smiley, but I would guess that I just have to roll my eyes here.


Dinosaurs haven't been around in at least 65 millions years. There were no humans around when dinosaurs walked this Earth.


Neither Job nor Psalm give enough description to know what these Leviathan or Behemoth.

JOB 40:17 “He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. Cedar can grow up to 130 feet and that is just the tail of this Behemoth.

Cedar can grow up to 130 feet and since God did not plant any seedlings then there cannot be a cedar that is not as tall as this one.

You have jump to the conclusion that the verse bending its tail like cedar (which mean the tail is "stiff"), as if it was talking about its height or size of the creature (behemoth). How stiff or bendy the tail is, doesn't describe its length, because it isn't talking about the length of the tail.

When are you going to understand that describing is like comparing. If I want to describe the Petronas Towers I would probably compare it to the Twin Towers. Can I compare it to the Chrysler building or the Sears tower? NO, I cannot for the obvious reason that your eyes can not perceive things that are not there or your perception is deceiving you if you do that.

You have a tendency to jump to the wrong conclusion, time and time again, never admitting you were wrong in your assumption. And even when you know that people say to you that you are wrong, you get all evasive, by trying to change the subject, or attempting to move the goal post, just so you can avoid admitting your assumptions were wrong.

Really? I think you are the one making a different conclusion by making analogies that is not there to begin with.

A number of times, you make wild and ignorant claims, and people have to try correct you, but instead of learning from your mistakes, you just make more absurd claims.

The problem is not just you being wrong - anyone and everyone make mistakes, including me - what really matter is that you learn from your mistake, and don't make the same mistake again.

I don’t think you are in a position to say something like this to me or to anyone. I’ve proven your theory wrong about the “Quirinius Census” on which you cannot refute at all. So, please don’t tell me that you are a better person than anyone or me because you are not.

I don't know what your educational background, but it is seriously lacking in the area of science. You don't seem to comprehend, that quoting from creationist website(s), which are not credible scientific sources, and when you do use something credible, you have twisted the context of text and whom you have quoted from. And that's not just ignorance, but willful dishonesty on your part.

I don’t have to brag my “educational background” to you or to anyone. I’ve admitted before and I will admit it again that most of the things that I was saying here came from the internet and if you say that you don’t do same then you are over qualified in this thread.

But not you. So far I have a lot of replies from other members that refute your claims on the matter of science (like, on biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc), and not once I have seen you admit the other party was right or correct. Instead your tactics is to be evasive and dig your own hole deeper by changing the goal post, by making up more wild and bogus claims.

Do you have any degree in any of these (like, on biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc) you’re talking about? NO? How can you tell if what I’m saying do not agree with these (like, on biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc)? Consensus perhaps?

 

[McBell]

You were debating the other guy about the “6 creative days” and you quoted the bible correctly. This is really confusing to me. You based your argument from the bible, but you are not sure if God do exist?

Your inability to understand the other side is reflection on you, not anyone else.

this is your post

Cedar can grow up to 130 feet and since God did not plant any seedlings then there cannot be a cedar that is not as tall as this one.
When are you going to understand that describing is like comparing. If I want to describe the Petronas Towers I would probably compare it to the Twin Towers. Can I compare it to the Chrysler building or the Sears tower? NO, I cannot for the obvious reason that your eyes can not perceive things that are not there or your perception is deceiving you if you do that.

Really?

Yes, really.

I think you are the one making a different conclusion by making analogies that is not there to begin with.
I don’t think you are in a position to say something like this to me or to anyone. I’ve proven your theory wrong about the “Quirinius Census” on which you cannot refute at all. So, please don’t tell me that you are a better person than anyone or me because you are not.

And here you have proven his point for him.
Congratulations!!

I don’t have to brag my “educational background” to you or to anyone. I’ve admitted before and I will admit it again that most of the things that I’ve saying came from the internet and if you say that you don’t do same then you are over qualified in this thread.

Do you have any degree in any of these (like, on biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc) you’re talking about? NO? How can you tell if what I’m saying do not agree with these (like, on biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc)? Consensus perhaps?

Do you?
What degrees do you hold?

Though to be perfectly honest, it will be extremely difficult is not outright impossible to take you seriously when you lie so much about evolution.

 

[JM2C]

Thermodynamics has a long history, but the real fun began with trying to understand & improve steam engine efficiency.

Here is a brief summary.....

History of thermodynamics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They want to build a perpetual-motion machine powered by heat/energy based on the theory of the 1st LoT. IOW, heat will energize heat to a never ending cycle of heat that can power any machine to infinity and beyond. But this theory ended when they discovered that the heat/energy is escaping, meaning it’s looking for something that is not hot but cold to heat it up and the energy is becoming a waste and the theory, although it’s not a theory anymore but a fact, of 2nd LoT was discovered.

 

[JM2C]

Your inability to understand the other side is reflection on you, not anyone else.





Yes, really.


And here you have proven his point for him.
Congratulations!!


Do you?
What degrees do you hold?

Though to be perfectly honest, it will be extremely difficult is not outright impossible to take you seriously when you lie so much about evolution.

Is there anything you can tell me besides this nonsense insults you and your friend been doing.

 

[Revoltingest]

They want to build a perpetual-motion machine powered by heat/energy based on the theory of the 1st LoT. IOW, heat will energize heat to a never ending cycle of heat that can power any machine to infinity and beyond. But this theory ended when they discovered that the heat/energy is escaping, meaning it’s looking for something that is not hot but cold to heat it up and the energy is becoming a waste and the theory, although it’s not a theory anymore but a fact, of 2nd LoT was discovered.

That's pretty much it.