Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does anyone believe in Evolution anymore?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    "Information" and "thermodynamics" are used by creationists who think that they sound sciencey, and might persuade people. Unfortunately, very few creationists understand either of these concepts and even fewer can actually do the math required to use them.

    If you want to watch a creationist tap dance, ask him to show you that any of Darwin's four points are ruled out by thermodynamics or information, and to show his math.

    You might as well be speaking Urdu as far as the creationist is concerned.
    This message is hidden because ...

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
      "Information" and "thermodynamics" are used by creationists who think that they sound sciencey, and might persuade people.
      Nope.

      I haven't spoken about thermodynamics, except to correct the Darwinists, who think when the topic is "entropy," it must be about heat transfer. It's not.

      For example, Wiki says:
      Information theory and mathematics
      Entropy (information theory), also called Shannon entropy, a measure of the unpredictability or information content of a message source
      Algorithmic entropy an (incomputable) measure of the information content of a particular message
      Entropy encoding, data compression strategies to produce a code length equal to the entropy of a message
      Entropy (computing), an indicator of the number of random bits available to seed cryptography systems
      Entropy (anesthesiology), a measure of a patient's cortical function, based on the mathematical entropy of EEG signals
      Entropy (ecology), measures of biodiversity in the study of biological ecology, based on Shannon and Renyi entropies
      Social entropy, a measure of the natural decay within a social system

      No heat there, but watch Darwinists start "teaching" about these things to avoid the actual topic.

      Unfortunately, very few Darwinists understand these concepts and even fewer can actually discuss them sensibly.

      If you want to watch a Darwinist tap dance, ask him to speak rationally regarding the evidence.

      Darwin's four points are:
      Individuals of a species are not identical,
      Traits are passed from generation to generation,
      More offspring are born than can survive, and,
      Only the survivors of the competition for resources will reproduce.

      Notice how Darwinists refuse to engage over the actual challenge. The actual challenge is to the theory of evolution, not points that Darwinists make up to equivocate on the issue. Specifically, evolution is the idea that all life is descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection. That is what we disagree with. Darwinists want the details of the discussion to be things like "change" or these "four points," which are not what is being questioned.

      They hate a sensible discussion.

      ڈارون کے پیروکاروں بیوقوف ہیں
      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
      E≈mc2
      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
      -Bob B.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Stripe View Post
        ڈارون کے پیروکاروں بیوقوف ہیں
        ダーウィンの信者は間違いなくばかげている。

        Comment


        • #49
          Lle holma ve' orch.
          This message is hidden because ...

          Comment


          • #50
            Barbarian observes:
            If you want to watch a creationist tap dance, ask him to show you that any of Darwin's four points are ruled out by thermodynamics or information, and to show his math.

            Prediction verified.
            This message is hidden because ...

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
              Lle holma ve' orch.
              Jibberish is expected from a barbarian.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                Barbarian observes:
                If you want to watch a creationist tap dance, ask him to show you that any of Darwin's four points are ruled out by thermodynamics or information, and to show his math.

                Prediction verified.
                Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                Nope.

                I haven't spoken about thermodynamics, except to correct the Darwinists, who think when the topic is "entropy," it must be about heat transfer. It's not.

                For example, Wiki says:
                Information theory and mathematics
                Entropy (information theory), also called Shannon entropy, a measure of the unpredictability or information content of a message source
                Algorithmic entropy an (incomputable) measure of the information content of a particular message
                Entropy encoding, data compression strategies to produce a code length equal to the entropy of a message
                Entropy (computing), an indicator of the number of random bits available to seed cryptography systems
                Entropy (anesthesiology), a measure of a patient's cortical function, based on the mathematical entropy of EEG signals
                Entropy (ecology), measures of biodiversity in the study of biological ecology, based on Shannon and Renyi entropies
                Social entropy, a measure of the natural decay within a social system

                No heat there, but watch Darwinists start "teaching" about these things to avoid the actual topic.

                Unfortunately, very few Darwinists understand these concepts and even fewer can actually discuss them sensibly.

                If you want to watch a Darwinist tap dance, ask him to speak rationally regarding the evidence.

                Darwin's four points are:
                Individuals of a species are not identical,
                Traits are passed from generation to generation,
                More offspring are born than can survive, and,
                Only the survivors of the competition for resources will reproduce.

                Notice how Darwinists refuse to engage over the actual challenge. The actual challenge is to the theory of evolution, not points that Darwinists make up to equivocate on the issue. Specifically, evolution is the idea that all life is descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection. That is what we disagree with. Darwinists want the details of the discussion to be things like "change" or these "four points," which are not what is being questioned.

                They hate a sensible discussion.

                ڈارون کے پیروکاروں بیوقوف ہیں

                Comment


                • #53
                  So a few errors to clean up here...

                  First, thermodynamics is about heat. Period. Entropy is a term used in thermodynamics to describe the way heat behaves.

                  Entropy happens to be a property of other phenomena as well:
                  There are close parallels between the mathematical expressions for the thermodynamic entropy, usually denoted by S, of a physical system in the statistical thermodynamics established by Ludwig Boltzmann and J. Willard Gibbs in the 1870s, and the information-theoretic entropy, usually expressed as H, of Claude Shannon and Ralph Hartley developed in the 1940s. Shannon commented on the similarity upon publicizing information theory in A Mathematical Theory of Communication.

                  This article explores what links there are between the two concepts, and how far they can be regarded as connected.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrop...rmation_theory

                  Ironically, information entropy is also a huge problem for creationists, who cannot explain the origin of new information in populations by mutation. (Simplified mathematical demonstration on request)

                  This is like confusing biological evolution with say, stellar evolution. It's why I recommend that creationists use Darwin's term "descent with modification." Less confusing for them.

                  Darwin's four points are:
                  Individuals of a species are not identical,
                  Traits are passed from generation to generation,
                  More offspring are born than can survive, and,
                  Only the survivors of the competition for resources will reproduce.
                  Nope, but not too bad for a creationist. Here there are: Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection

                  1. More individuals are produced each generation that can survive.
                  2. Phenotypic variation exists among individuals and the variation is heritable.
                  3. Those individuals with heritable traits better suited to the environment will survive.
                  3 When reproductive isolation occurs (due to changes in the population) new species will form.

                  Notice how Darwinists refuse to engage over the actual challenge. The actual challenge is to the theory of evolution, not points that Darwinists make up to equivocate on the issue. Specifically, evolution is the idea that all life is descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection.
                  Here, our friend has confused an agency of evolution (natural selection)and a consequence of evolution (common descent) with the actual phenomenon of evolution, which is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time.

                  Common error, among those who have never actually studied biology.
                  This message is hidden because ...

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                    Ironically, information entropy is also a huge problem for creationists, who cannot explain the origin of new information in populations by mutation. (Simplified mathematical demonstration on request)
                    Ironically, you have it exactly backwards. There is no "new information" from mutations. If there was, you could (perhaps) prove it.
                    All of my ancestors are human.
                    Originally posted by Squeaky
                    That explains why your an idiot.
                    Originally posted by God's Truth
                    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Nothing but errors to clean up here:

                      Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                      Thermodynamics is about heat.
                      This discussion is not about heat. Period.

                      Information entropy is also a huge problem for creationists, who cannot explain the origin of new information in populations by mutation.
                      Nope.

                      Mutations can never improve a genome's information.

                      And we've carefully defined what we mean by information. Hint, it's not Shannon.

                      I recommend that creationists use Darwin's term "descent with modification."
                      This is the goal of the Darwinist: Force people to use their religious terms. That way, debate is defined out of existence.

                      Descent with modification is another nothingism. It's just the "evolution is change" stupidity dressed up. We don't argue that things don't change.

                      To engage rationally — the thing the Darwinist most fears — you need to respond to what we say, not what you wish we would say.

                      Not too bad for a creationist.
                      Google, dimwit.

                      Evolution ... is a change.
                      Darwinists want inanity the basis of their religion. That way, it is insulated from scientific inquiry.

                      The challenge is to evolution, ie, the idea that all living things are descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection.
                      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                      E≈mc2
                      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                      -Bob B.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Barbarian observes:
                        Ironically, information entropy is also a huge problem for creationists, who cannot explain the origin of new information in populations by mutation. (Simplified mathematical demonstration on request)


                        Originally posted by Right Divider View Post
                        Ironically, you have it exactly backwards. There is no "new information" from mutations. If there was, you could (perhaps) prove it.
                        Sure. It's math, so proof is easy. Information is the Shannon entropy. It's related to the uncertainty of the message. The more uncertainty, the more information in the message.

                        The information for any given gene in a population genome is the negative sum of the frequency of each allele, times the logarithm of the frequency of that allele.



                        So let's suppose there is a population with two alleles for a specific gene, each with a frequency of 0.5. The information for that gene in the population is then a bit over 0.3

                        Now let's suppose a new mutation appears and it eventually increases so that each allele has a frequency of about 0.333... (each one-third of the total).

                        Now, the information is about 0.477. An increase in information. Because, remember, there is a higher a priori uncertainty in a message with more information.

                        QED

                        If you'd like to use different numbers, it still works. As you now realize, any new mutation increases information in a population genome.

                        This is a devastating problem for creationism, but it's a prediction of evolutionary theory.

                        However, evolution does not require an increase in information. Often, a decrease in information results from evolution. Do you see why?
                        This message is hidden because ...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                          Barbarian observes:
                          It's a pity he won't think.

                          Any new mutation increases information in a population genome.
                          As is typical, you're equivocating. This is Shannon information. We have defined out terms clearly, but you hate a rational discussion.

                          This is a devastating problem for Darwinists, but they will do anything to protect their precious religion.

                          Evolution does not require an increase in information.
                          Evolution is the idea that all living things are descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection. That ancestor necessarily did not embody the vast array of information that is encoded in the genomes of today.

                          To sum up: Barbarian is a dishonest troll. He has no interest in a rational discussion over the evidence. That notion scares him to death.
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                            However, evolution does not require an increase in information. Often, a decrease in information results from evolution. Do you see why?


                            You are seriously, absolutely, immensely and completely HILARIOUS.

                            Life is ALL about information. DNA is INFORMATION.
                            All of my ancestors are human.
                            Originally posted by Squeaky
                            That explains why your an idiot.
                            Originally posted by God's Truth
                            Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                            Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                            (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                            1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                            (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                            Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                              To sum up: Barbarian is a dishonest troll.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                                Should trolls be banned for good?



                                Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                                E≈mc2
                                "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                                "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                                -Bob B.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X