home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.origins
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!news.iastate.edu!pv7440.vincent.iastate.edu!btd
- From: btd@iastate.edu (Benjamin T Dehner)
- Subject: Re: The 2nd law of Kalkidynamics
- Message-ID: <btd.722298677@pv7440.vincent.iastate.edu>
- Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
- References: <By049D.uK@well.sf.ca.us>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:31:17 GMT
- Lines: 37
-
- In <By049D.uK@well.sf.ca.us> keithd@well.sf.ca.us (Keith Doyle) writes:
-
-
- >BTW, it looks to me like the Kalki's (or actually, their hero
- >Dr. Thomson's) arguments from information theory are simply new
- >flavors of the 2nd law of Thermodynamics creationist arguments.
- >Information (anti-entropy) cannot increase, therefore evolution
- >cannot occur. (and OBTW, *growth* as well has to be included
- >here, as it too is an increase in information content/decrease
- >in entropy)
-
- Furthermore, you can never design an experiment to show him
- wrong. Why? Simple -- go on, design an experiment, g'wan, I dare
- you :). Kalki will simply reply 'ah, but there was a source of in-
- telligence that DESIGNED the experiment, so any consequences are only
- a reflection of the designer'.
-
- >Do I get any points for recognizing mutated worn out old
- >creationist bogosities?
-
- I'd say a point just for pointing it out directly and concisely.
-
- >Aww, I guess not, with all the recent talk about snowflakes,
- >someone else must have noticed the similarity by now.
-
- It's Chris's game, let him decide :)
-
- >Keith
-
- Ben
-
- "Don't you get me wrong, I only want to know" -- J.I.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Benjamin T. Dehner Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
- btd@iastate.edu Iowa State University
- Ames, IA 50011
-
-