Evolution Versus Devolution

Gracchus · Oct 3, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
The second law of thermodynamics states that things are devolving, that things are getting worse, while evolving swears that things are getting better. In other words, evolution contradicts the second law of thermodynamics.

Thermodynamics is about heat (thermo) movement (dynamics). A flow has a beginning,or source and an ending, a sink. The second law states that heat will not spontaneously flow from a cooler source to a warmer sink. Thus, the second law has nothing to do with biological evolution.

This has been pointed out to you before. Yet you continue to mistate the second law, and its implications for evolution. Since you are clearly not a liar, or insane, I must assume that you just don't understand.

By the way, the theory of evolution does not say that things are getting better. It states that the genetic make-up of an interbreeding population responds to environmental pressures. You should inform yourself concerning subjects you post about lest folks mistake you for a braying jackass. No one would want to make such a mistake.

Wiccan_Child · Oct 3, 2012

jpcedotal said:
The universe is winding down in the same way a wind-up watch does.

And, like a watch, entropy can decrease in local areas, sometimes for large amounts of time,.

jpcedotal said:
The religion of evolution

By all means, define 'religion', define 'evolution', and show how the latter is the former.

jpcedotal said:
is just a spin off of the whole Utopia ideal

Source?

jpcedotal said:
and contradicts real science.

Since you've demonstrated that you don't quite know what real science is, you'll forgive me if I'm sceptical.

sfs · Oct 3, 2012

jpcedotal said:
The universe is winding down in the same way a wind-up watch does.

The religion of evolution is just a spin off of the whole Utopia ideal and contradicts real science.

Why do you think you know more about "real science" than real scientists do? Isn't that a little arrogant?

pgp_protector · Oct 3, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
pgp_protector said:

Start on this page -> An introduction to evolution
Finish on this page -> Trends in evolution

And you'll have a better understanding of Evolution. At your given age, if you've graduated High School with an Average reading proficiency, you should be able to understand the material.

Click to expand...

You do not understand what I am trying to say.

Maybe you need to ask better questions.
If pointing out a simplified explanation of Evolution isn't what you're asking about, then don't say

JoeyArnold said:
If I understood science, then I would not be the one asking the questions here.

When asking about Evolution.

AECellini · Oct 3, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
The second law of thermodynamics states that things are devolving, that things are getting worse, while evolving swears that things are getting better.

the second law states that an isolated systems ability to do work decreases over time.

show me how evolution violates this.

Tiberius · Oct 3, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Evolution Versus Devolution. Is our universe evolving or devolving? The second law of thermodynamics states that things are devolving, that things are getting worse, while evolving swears that things are getting better. In other words, evolution contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. Things clearly devolve. That is why we die, after all.

Define evolution and devolution for us please.

GrowingSmaller · Oct 4, 2012

Parable of the talents.

JoeyArnold · Oct 4, 2012

Can somebody define for me what "Survival of the Fittest" means?

AV1611VET · Oct 4, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Can somebody define for me what "Survival of the Fittest" means?

This preservation of favourable individual differences and variations, and the destruction of those which are injurious, I have called Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest. - Charles Darwin, The Preservation of Favoured Races

JoeyArnold · Oct 4, 2012

AV1611VET said:
This preservation of favourable individual differences and variations, and the destruction of those which are injurious, I have called Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest. - Charles Darwin, The Preservation of Favoured Races

So in Natural Selection (Survival of the Fittest), who survives & who don't? What determines survival?

AV1611VET · Oct 4, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
So in Natural Selection (Survival of the Fittest), who survives & who don't?

No one.

JoeyArnold said:
What determines survival?

Mother Nature, the goddess of scientism, determines who lives longer and who dies sooner.

JoeyArnold · Oct 4, 2012

AV1611VET said:
Mother Nature, the goddess of scientism, determines who lives longer and who dies sooner.

Does that eliminate freewill? If external sources are determining who lives & who dies, then that means I have no say in the matter, right? If Natural Selection means that nature decides who survives & who don't, then that probably means that it is not really survival of the fittest. I mean, if nature decides, then nature decides who is the fittest.

It reminds me of Lady Gaga's song Born This Way. Hitler believed in this. It is all in the genes, in the DNA. Whoever has the better genes survive. If nature decides, then does that mean that we have no say in the matter at all? Some people simple can run faster? Some people simple are smarter? Some people are better having kids? Some people are simple stronger & better at fighting? Some people live longer & some people don't? Some people get sicker more? It is all in the blood, in the DNA, because nature decides & we don't?

Ana the Ist · Oct 4, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
If I understood science, then I would not be the one asking the questions here.

Can I use this quote in my signature?

Wiccan_Child · Oct 5, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
So in Natural Selection (Survival of the Fittest), who survives & who don't? What determines survival?

Nature. Specifically, the natural environment in which the individual happens to find itself. A creature with long fur will survive better in colder environments, but may die of heatstroke in hotter environments. A 'longer fur' mutation can thus be either beneficial or detrimental - it depends on the natural environment.

When humans artificially determine which mutations get propagated into the next generation, we call that artificial selection.

Wiccan_Child · Oct 5, 2012

Ana the Ist said:
Can I use this quote in my signature?

It seems to me to be the most sensible thing he's said - "I don't understand this topic, so I'm asking questions". What's wrong with that?

Wiccan_Child · Oct 5, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Does that eliminate freewill? If external sources are determining who lives & who dies, then that means I have no say in the matter, right? If Natural Selection means that nature decides who survives & who don't, then that probably means that it is not really survival of the fittest. I mean, if nature decides, then nature decides who is the fittest.

It reminds me of Lady Gaga's song Born This Way. Hitler believed in this. It is all in the genes, in the DNA. Whoever has the better genes survive. If nature decides, then does that mean that we have no say in the matter at all? Some people simple can run faster? Some people simple are smarter? Some people are better having kids? Some people are simple stronger & better at fighting? Some people live longer & some people don't? Some people get sicker more? It is all in the blood, in the DNA, because nature decides & we don't?

Yep. It's simply a fact that we don't have a say in what genetics we're born with. Thus, it's simply a fact that some people are born with genetics that predisposes them to being able to run faster.

That said, it's up to us whether or not we actually do any running. Maybe we just never exercise those muscles, and though we have superior running genes, we just never utilise them.

All of science is descriptive, not proscriptive; evolution describes how populations develop, not how they should develop. There's nothing in the theory that says humans should build a society based on natural selection. Humans have thrown off the shackles of evolution, and there's no reason to put them back on.

Tomk80 · Oct 5, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Does that eliminate freewill? If external sources are determining who lives & who dies, then that means I have no say in the matter, right? If Natural Selection means that nature decides who survives & who don't, then that probably means that it is not really survival of the fittest. I mean, if nature decides, then nature decides who is the fittest.

You have a weird definition of free will. Free will pertains to the choices you make, not to the circumstances you are in and how you arrive at those circumstances.

If you are stuck out in the Antarctic without clothing, you will die. If you have a mutation causing cystic fibrosis, without treatment you will die. If you are stuck in the desert without water, you will die. That doesn't mean that you cannot make choices in how you live your life.

It reminds me of Lady Gaga's song Born This Way. Hitler believed in this. It is all in the genes, in the DNA. Whoever has the better genes survive. If nature decides, then does that mean that we have no say in the matter at all? Some people simple can run faster? Some people simple are smarter? Some people are better having kids? Some people are simple stronger & better at fighting? Some people live longer & some people don't? Some people get sicker more? It is all in the blood, in the DNA, because nature decides & we don't?

Can you give a straight answer here for a minute? Do you really, seriously believe that you have a choice in which DNA you got and which drawbacks or benefits you derive from that? Because newsflash, you don't. And that's not what life is about. Life not about what cards we were dealt. Life is about what we do with the cards we were dealt.

JoeyArnold · Oct 5, 2012

How did we go from inorganic to organic?

Ana the Ist · Oct 5, 2012

Wiccan_Child said:
It seems to me to be the most sensible thing he's said - "I don't understand this topic, so I'm asking questions". What's wrong with that?

Nothing wrong with it, but are you kidding me? When was the last time you saw a hardline Christian admitting he doesn't know science AND he wants to know??!! You should be marking this day on your calendar, it may never come again.

Speaking of signatures, his cracks me up. "Never stop being who you really are." How can anyone ever stop being who they really are?

Wiccan_Child · Oct 5, 2012

Ana the Ist said:
Nothing wrong with it, but are you kidding me? When was the last time you saw a hardline Christian admitting he doesn't know science AND he wants to know??!!

Not very long ago at all. My long-running (and now dormant) thread, 'Ask a Physicist Anything', saw many honest questions posed by members of CF across the board, even from some of the more fundamentalist Christians here.

You'd be surprised how willing people are to learn, when they're treated with calmness and respect (even if they don't treat you in the same way).

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Evolution Versus Devolution

Senior Veteran

Contributor

Senior Member

Noted strange person

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Muslm Humanist

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Aggressively serene!

Contributor

Contributor

Contributor

Titleless

Well-Known Member

Aggressively serene!

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency