Critical Mass of Science Denial / Ignorance

[Michael]

You are really talking about psychology of belief here.

When someone has a personal belief that is so near and dear to them and it just so happens, well evidenced reality contradicts this belief, what follows can be interesting.

A person can either come to realize their belief was mistaken, or they can build defense mechanisms to protect these beliefs. The defense mechanisms include; outright denial of this evidence, claiming the evidence is of an evil source and confirmation bias, looking for anything or anyone who agrees with them.

It really comes down to this; when it becomes to painful (internally) for someone to continue to deal with cognitive dissonance and a need to deny well evidenced reality, they will succumb to reality and adjust their beliefs. With some though, it is far to painful to give up the belief, so the battle with cognitive dissonance and assuring the defense mechanisms are strong, continues.

It is a really interesting process to watch in action.

Emphasis mine.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15850

The process that you describe, particularly the denial of evidence as a self defense mechanism, when it plays out in scientific circles is indeed quite fascinating. Long held, and long taught societal belief are not easily dismissed based upon a few lab failures, or discoveries of massive "methodology flaws" in previous studies.

Some belief systems are simply so deeply rooted in all areas of our society that it simply becomes psychologically easier to sweep the conflicting evidence right under the rug, and trudge forward as though nothing happened to refute the so called "predictions" of their belief systems. Denial of evidence is pretty much a universal behavior when the belief systems come into conflict with real empirical physical evidence.

 

[VirOptimus]

Could be, I suppose.

Christianity is not as big of a thing here (or religion at all really). Its considered a private thing and have little to no role in politics or the daily life of most citizens.

 

[AV1611VET]

Christianity is not as big of a thing here (or religion at all really). Its considered a private thing and have little to no role in politics or the daily life of most citizens.

We call those places "mission fields."

 

[VirOptimus]

We call those places "mission fields."

That ship has sailed a long time ago.

 

[pat34lee]

The laws of thermodynamics have absolutely nothing to do with evolution and everything to do with heat transfer.

Did I mention the laws of thermodynamics?
I mentioned a fact which is irrefutable.

 

[Michael]

That ship has sailed a long time ago.

As long as new humans are being born onto the planet, that ship will keep on sailing too.

 

[expos4ever]

Did I mention the laws of thermodynamics?
I mentioned a fact which is irrefutable.

I believe you are mistaken. You wrote:

And yet it can not be shown ever that anything
goes from disorder to order without a plan, and
without an intelligent and purposed application
of energy. Without both, adding energy is only
destructive.

However, when water cools (energy taken away) the disordered liquid water molecules freeze into an ordered structure. And I am convinced there are many other examples where "order" appears with no evidence at all of a "plan".

 

[expos4ever]

<staff edit>
I do not know much about this, but is it not true that the laws of thermodynamics do indeed make assertions about "order". More specifically, I believe the laws assert that in a closed system, overall disorder must invariably increase over time.

Of course, none of this refutes evolution - the earth is certainly not a closed system and, even if it were, I do not see why evolution could still not proceed since "local" increase in order are still allowed.

 

[RickG]

I do not know much about this, but is it not true that the laws of thermodynamics do indeed make assertions about "order". More specifically, I believe the laws assert that in a closed system, overall disorder must invariably increase over time.

Of course, none of this refutes evolution - the earth is certainly not a closed system and, even if it were, I do not see why evolution could still not proceed since "local" increase in order are still allowed.

Well, as I mentioned, if each generation moves toward disorder then everything gets worse. In fact, it would be evolution in reverse. As for a closed system that is specific to the 2nd law. We do not live in a closed system.

 

[expos4ever]

Well, as I mentioned, if each generation moves toward disorder then everything gets worse. In fact, it would be evolution in reverse. As for a closed system that is specific to the 2nd law. We do not live in a closed system.

I agree, but, to be fair to other poster, it is, in context, slightly misleading to claim that the laws of thermodynamics are "specific to heat transfer"; they do indeed make claims about the conceptually distinct (I think) category of "order". Either way, we agree that it is manifestly false to claim that any law of thermodynamics renders evolution impossible.

 

[RickG]

I agree, but, to be fair to other poster, it is, in context, slightly misleading to claim that the laws of thermodynamics are "specific to heat transfer"; they do indeed make claims about the conceptually distinct (I think) category of "order". Either way, we agree that it is manifestly false to claim that any law of thermodynamics renders evolution impossible.

Well, actually a conversion from one state (type of energy) to another. The same thing occurs in chemical processes as well which is were my understanding of thermodynamics was applied.

 

[pat34lee]

<staff edit>

Again, I never mentioned the laws of thermodynamics.
Name one thing that without addition or loss of energy
in a way that requires that energy be directed in a non-random
meaningful and precise way, gets more organized, instead
of descending into chaos. Wordy, I know.

IOW, without energy being directed in an intelligent way and
controlled to a precise degree, you will never cause anything
but chaos, destruction and disorder. Prove otherwise if you can.

 

[pat34lee]

Well, as I mentioned, if each generation moves toward disorder then everything gets worse. In fact, it would be evolution in reverse. As for a closed system that is specific to the 2nd law. We do not live in a closed system.

What do we see in nature everywhere? Your first two
statements sum it up nicely. I call it devolution. Life
process do what they can to keep it at bay, but they
are losing out little by little. The end of the road is
inevitable: extinction.

As to the last two sentences. It could be argued that
we live in an open system. It could also be argued
that we are a closed system as a living being. We
use energy to grow and reproduce, but in the end,
we die. At least physically.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What do we see in nature everywhere? Your first two
statements sum it up nicely. I call it devolution. Life
process do what they can to keep it at bay, but they
are losing out little by little. The end of the road is
inevitable: extinction.

That is only looking at life as a pessimist does. And they have always been with us and always will. One can find writings by ancient Greek writers complaining that the kids of today are not as respectful as they were. It seems that time can color our imaginations quite a bit.

As to the last two sentences. It could be argued that
we live in an open system. It could also be argued
that we are a closed system as a living being. We
use energy to grow and reproduce, but in the end,
we die. At least physically.

I will disagree with Rick on his statement, but that is only because the definition of "systems" has changed over the years. Today there are three different classic systems in thermodynamics. And the change has clarified it so that it is much harder to get the sort of system one lives in wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_system

The first is an isolated system. In an isolated system neither energy nor matter can get in or out. The isolated system is the one where the entropy of the system must go up.

The second is a closed system. In a closed system energy can enter and leave, but matter cannot. The Earth is essentially a closed system. Yes, small amounts of matter both enter and leave, but they have no real effect on the thermodynamics of the system as a whole. The simplified version of the Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be applied here. The law still applies, but it is not the simple version that creationists want to use. And that is lucky for us. Because according to the creationist version life itself is impossible. If you are alive you know that they are wrong.

And the third system is an open system. Both energy and matter go in and out. A car engine is a perfect example. The SLoT still applies, but again the simple version cannot be used.

 

[Chris B]

That the internet would facilitate a "marketplace of ideas" was never in doubt...

As I've said before... give an idiot a soapbox, and eventually, bigger idiots will come along and listen. What is the Internet if not a global soapbox?

The other thing it does it let people find like minds.
Now the individual with the oddest of odd thinking can find a group of people to nod agreement and generate mutual reinforcement of beliefs.

 

[RickG]

As to the last two sentences. It could be argued that
we live in an open system. It could also be argued
that we are a closed system as a living being. We
use energy to grow and reproduce, but in the end,
we die. At least physically.

<staff edit> It cannot be argued that we live in a closed system. Tectonic forces within the earth and irradiation from the sun are the external driving forces affecting everything on the surface of the earth. If we were in a closed system there would be no seasons or even weather.

 

[expos4ever]

Name one thing that without addition or loss of energy
in a way that requires that energy be directed in a non-random
meaningful and precise way, gets more organized, instead
of descending into chaos. Wordy, I know.

IOW, without energy being directed in an intelligent way and
controlled to a precise degree, you will never cause anything
but chaos, destruction and disorder. Prove otherwise if you can.

I do not fully understand what you are asking, and even if I did I am probably not qualified to answer.

But it is basically certain that you are mistaken precisely because it is wildly implausible that you, presumably not a physicist, have stumbled onto such an obvious flaw in the current mainstream view about how life arose. There is probably a term for this kind of argument - when one non-qualified person claims to have discovered an obvious problem with mainstream scientific consensus. In order for you to be correct, either one of two things must be true:

1. The thousands of experts have all missed this obvious argument you are making;
2. The thousands of experts know you are right, but are engaged in a massive conspiracy to suppress the truth.

Neither one is remotely plausible - one might as well believe that the moon landings were faked.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again, I never mentioned the laws of thermodynamics.
Name one thing that without addition or loss of energy
in a way that requires that energy be directed in a non-random
meaningful and precise way, gets more organized, instead
of descending into chaos. Wordy, I know.

IOW, without energy being directed in an intelligent way and
controlled to a precise degree, you will never cause anything
but chaos, destruction and disorder. Prove otherwise if you can.

A simple snowflake proves that you are wrong. No "intelligence" is needed for the formation of a snowflake.

 

[ScottA]

A simple snowflake proves that you are wrong. No "intelligence" is needed for the formation of a snowflake.

That is only true in elementary intelligence, only on the surface.

 

[pat34lee]

A simple snowflake proves that you are wrong. No "intelligence" is needed for the formation of a snowflake.

Snowflakes and crystals are examples of symmetry, not order.
They grow the way they do because that is the path of least
resistance, or lowest energy used. Their design, if you will.