Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[Bunyip]

Aye, there was clearly dishonesty in some in that movement.
They dun got caught in the act.
But regarding posters holding unscientific beliefs, I'll presume honesty until there's evidence to the contrary.

I would presume honesty in cases where the person shows some familiarity with the aspect of science they are challenging and discount honesty where they do not. The 'Gish Gallop' is another great indicator - when a person simply introduces new claims, rather than defending prior claims.

An honest person will back a claim they make and respond to data. A dishonest person fires claims like a gattling gun in the hope one will hit.

 

[Revoltingest]

Perhaps I'm just resistant to the "d" word (dishonest) because I get accused of it regularly.....falsely, I might add.

 

[Bunyip]

Perhaps I'm just resistant to the "d" word (dishonest) because I get accused of it regularly.....falsely, I might add.

Me too. But there must come a point where repeating a long exposed fraud becomes unexplainable by claiming ignorance. Take Ray Comfort for example - it is not possible to spend 30 years arguing about evolution without figuring out what scientists mean by 'evolution'.
Ignorance forgives the original claim, but not the continued defence.

 

[McBell]

Ignorance forgives the original claim, but not the continued defence.

Or the continuously repeating the same claim over and over regardless of how many times they are shown to be flat out wrong.

At some point it becomes lying, not ignorance.

 

[Bunyip]

Or the continuously repeating the same claim over and over regardless of how many times they are shown to be flat out wrong.

At some point it becomes lying, not ignorance.

And with all the generosity of heart possible, that point was passed some time last century.

In many of the most prominent Creationist 'education' cites they still refer to the Paluxy River tracks as evidence against evolution - one of the perpetrators, George Adams admitted perpetrating the hoax and was convicted way back in the 30's.
I think that allowing say half a century to pass before an exposed hoax stops being perpetuated on a site claiming to be educational should be sufficient. But with some of these old horrors like the Piltdown man still haunting us a century later it gets a bit ridiculous.

 

[JM2C]

I am aware. What's the relevance?

You said

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

Then I said: Absolute Zero (0° K) is –273.15°C or –459.67°F.

We are talking temperature, right? Are they relevant now?

Right, but that doesn't keep the fridge from reversing entropy locally.

Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

Try to understand this: Only life can give life and sustain life till it dies and not the other way around.

No, nor did I imply such.

Nor did I say you did. It’s a yes or no question.

I eat non-living things all the time and don't get sick. I'm pretty sure the bread I just ate was quite dead.

Let us then observe if we place this piece of bread in any environment will turn into trillions of living cell a million years from now.

One would have to prove that such was the case first.

Prior to 1841, i.e., before the word dinosaur was created, what was the word they use to describe them? Dragon? Leviathan? Sea Monster? Behemoth? YES! Do a research and you’ll find out.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

Er, no it is not. The second law of thermodynamics has absolutely nothing to do with life as life is an open system. The main principle of the second law of thermodynamics is that in a closed system no instance can occur in which the transfer of heat energy is from a cooler to a hotter body.

Try to understand this: Only life can give life and sustain life till it dies and not the other way around.

That is not even remotely what the second law of thermodynamics states, nor does it have anything to do with what the second law addresses.

Prior to 1841, i.e., before the word dinosaur was created, what was the word they use to describe them? Dragon? Leviathan? Sea Monster? Behemoth? YES! Do a research and you’ll find out.

You're asking what people called dinosaurs before people knew dinosaurs existed? Do you not know why that's a silly question?

 

[JM2C]

I use artificial sweeteners in many things, molecules that are produced solely by chemistry that have at no time been anywhere near being alive.

We are talking about dead molecules to living cells to tens of trillions of living cells in a man, so please do not deviate from this argument. Dead cannot give life and that was the main principle of the 2nd LoT. They applied this first to a machine and found out later they could apply this to nature. You have not explained anything to me yet on how you understand 2nd LoT, until you do please stop telling me that you knew something because obviously you don’t.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Dead cannot give life and that was the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

Please stop lying.

The second law of thermodynamics has absolutely nothing to do with living systems - it is a law regarding the behaviour of energy in closed systems. Please stop making stuff up about a law you clearly know very little about.

 

[Revoltingest]

We are talking about dead molecules to living cells to tens of trillions of living cells in a man, so please do not deviate from this argument. Dead cannot give life and that was the main principle of the 2nd LoT. They applied this first to a machine and found out later they could apply this to nature. You have not explained anything to me yet on how you understand 2nd LoT, until you do please stop telling me that you knew something because obviously you don’t.

The problem here is that life is not a closed system, so the 2nd law doesn't prevent reanimation.
Tis the chemistry of life which prevents it, ie, a dead organism from becoming alive again.
Remember that there are more laws & processes at work than just thermodynamics.

But there's another way to view this.
Dead organisms do provide energy & material for existing & new life, just different individuals.
So long as the system is open (with energy flowing in), life continues, with some lives being replaced with others.

 

[David M]

Dead cannot give life and that was the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

Stop lying. 2nd LoT does not prevent non-living matter organising into living matter. It limits the conditions where it may happen but those limitations do not come into force when you are talking about the earth or anything upon it because the earth is not an isolated system.

 

[Revoltingest]

Please stop lying.

The second law of thermodynamics has absolutely nothing to do with living systems - it is a law regarding the behaviour of energy in closed systems. Please stop making stuff up about a law you clearly know very little about.

The 2nd law does affect living systems, just not in the way he envisions.
The amount of energy (eg, chemical, radiation, heat) entering a physically defined open system will place limits upon the amount of activity there.
It's why cool dark caves have less biomass than sunny rain forests.

I point this out to illustrate that the 2nd law is at work regarding life, even though it isn't what prevents reanimation of dead individuals.

 

[JM2C]

Er, no it is not. The second law of thermodynamics has absolutely nothing to do with life as life is an open system. The main principle of the second law of thermodynamics is that in a closed system no instance can occur in which the transfer of heat energy is from a cooler to a hotter body.

You got it the other way around or the reverse process. It is impossible to have a process that transfers heat from cool objects to warm objects without using work, but the fridge made this possible and this is what emergence was saying.

Right, but that doesn't keep the fridge from reversing entropy locally.

and I said: Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

Heat energy escapes TO a cooler place, [NOT FROM A COOLER TO HOTTER], to heat up this cool place to bring it to an even temperature and when the temperature evens up this what you call a heat death.

 

[JM2C]

That is not even remotely what the second law of thermodynamics states, nor does it have anything to do with what the second law addresses.

From the way you understand the 2nd LoT? Well I’m not really surprise why you said this.

 

[JM2C]

You're asking what people called dinosaurs before people knew dinosaurs existed? Do you not know why that's a silly question?

Not really

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You got it the other way around or the reverse process.

No, I haven't. Are you saying the law should state that no instance can occur in which the transfer of heat energy goes from a hotter to a cooler body?

It is impossible to have a process that transfers heat from cool objects to warm objects without using work, but the fridge made this possible and this is what emergence was saying. and I said: Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

But, as I explained, life is an open system and is not subject to the second law. So how can that be "the main principle" of the second law?

Heat energy escapes TO a cooler place, [NOT FROM A COOLER TO HOTTER], to heat up this cool place to bring it to an even temperature and when the temperature evens up this what you call a heat death.

That's exactly what I wrote. Read it again:

"The main principle of the second law of thermodynamics is that in a closed system no instance can occur in which the transfer of heat energy is from a cooler to a hotter body."

 

[jonathan180iq]

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Best thing about that picture is the look on the guy's face. The sheer cocky arrogance of the ignorant is hilarious to me.

 

[JM2C]

That's exactly what I wrote. Read it again:

"The main principle of the second law of thermodynamics is that in a closed system no instance can occur in which the transfer of heat energy is from a cooler to a hotter body."

I apologize for misreading your statement..
Edit: but from my post it says:Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I apologize for misreading your statement..

Easy mistake to make.

Edit: but from my post it says:Exactly! IOW, you can’t reverse life and that is the main principle of the 2nd LoT.

And I still must object that "you can't reverse life" is NOT the "main principle" of the second law. The second law says absolutely nothing about life or living systems whatsoever - it deal exclusively with closed systems.