Evolution The Great Lie

Try re-reading FluxIt's statement re. imposing religious beliefs onto science.

Unless and until you are able to avoid doing such you will be able to neither understand science nor engage in scientific discovery.

1) self-organized and organized systems are not the same thing. Organized systems are naturally occurring. Self-organization is the presence of intelligence in which the system 'decides' based on information to organize on its on cognizance.

2) There is a ground state in which things organized from once energy is applied and return to when energy is dissipated.

3) I truly dislike your argumentative style. Stop it.

a (1) : knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction (2) : INTELLIGENCE, NEWS (3) : FACTS, DATA

b : the attribute [b]inherent in[/b] and communicated by [b]one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something[/b] (as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects

c (1) : a signal or character (as in a communication system or computer) [b]representing data[/b] (2) : something (as a message, experimental data, or a picture) which justifies change in a construct (as a plan or theory) that represents physical or mental experience or another construct

Therefore, information is [i]intrinsic[/i].

"[i]Self-organization is the presence of intelligence[/i]."

Draws a conclusion from facts not in evidence.

"[i]There is a ground state in which things organized from once energy is applied and return to when energy is dissipated.[/i]"

The organization of a system more often than not results in a [i]lowering[/i] of its energy, not by increasing it. Excitation of s system via an increase in energy causes [i]dis[/i]organization.

The closest thing to a "ground state" occurs at a temperature of Absolute Zero.

I also notice that you failed to address my item 4.

I strongly urge you to re-visit the 2 Law of Thermodynamics, beginning at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
and proceeding to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organisation#Self-organization_vs._entropy

The organized crystal form of snowflakes occurs under certain, specific conditions: when water vapor freezes in clouds. This is indeed a natural process. So is the organization present in biological organisms. The conditions under which that organization occurs is certainly more complex, but that it "requires a degree of communication between components in order to become something more" is too vague a claim to bother contradicting. The conditions several billion years ago did not permit, or did not promote, the self-organization of life on Earth. But the fact that our current understanding of the 4 forces, and the exact way that they compelled carbon & other atoms to organize into sentient life forms, does not imply that "information" was absent, and in no way implies the presence of some supernatural force, omniscient or in possession of any "higher" form of information. It only means that we are not omniscient. Only fools believe that one's lack of omniscience requires the existence of some other omniscient being.

"Some suggest that biological systems self-organize in the temporal domain to develop increased complexity known as evolution. Information must be a part of this process in a closed loop feedback system that instructs changes to DNA and directs nanotechnologies to endow the changes."

[i]Information[/i] is in the eye of the beholder. Some look at a hard disk and see an oversized refrigerator magnet. Others see information, because we know that the magnetic fields on the disk are organized for a purpose. We don't know that the 4 forces and the structure of matter are organized from The Beginning to cause life to evolve. We don't know the contrary, either.

Some of us are honest about what we don't know, and what ignorance implies, which is: [b]nothing[/b].

"I think that there is a disconnect in the dialogues. As I read through I noted that Yoodler was using the term 'indeterminant' which means not predictable in mathematics.

You guys are saying the same thing but using words that are a disconnect."

If you can explain how I'm saying the same thing as Yoodler, using different vocabulary, please do so.

Natural Organization and Self-Organization are two very different things. Natural organization occurs under the processes of nature and does not involve communication or any degree of intelligence. ie Water freezes and organizes into a crystaline structure as the character of that process orders. Snow flakes organize naturally.

Self-organization implies a requirement for self-wareness and the ability to modify ones own system to achieve complex results. ie the sum of the parts are greater than the whole. The extent of the self-organizations vs natural organization in biological systems is in debate.

Flocking, herding, and feeding behaviors indicate perhaps a self-organizing tendency. Elephants responding to a baby elephant cries while in distress to defend its position by surrounding it while the mother rescues it is a self-organizing behavior.

Evolutionary processes would not be self-organizing but natural organizing behavior as there is no communication or awareness of the process.

Before you shoot your d!ck off again, you would be well advised to check the Profile of the person to whom you are replying.

And, when replying, stick to the facts at hand, rather than resorting to juvenile name calling.

that you aren't able to disprove?

Why do you assume that the act of stating an assertion puts the burden upon the skeptic to disprove your Celestial Arrogance? You have not substantiated your claims of a relevant difference between "natural" and "self-organizing", and I will not take you seriously until you do. Which means, never!

Do you really believe that you can simply call something by any name that you choose, and give it those characteristics that you desire, and not be challenged?

You, sir, are being intellectually dishonest, and in doing so show yourself to be no more than the pseudo-intellectual that Yoodler, in all of his numerous aliases, has repeatedly shown himself to be.

For so long as you persist in substituting foregone conclusion for that wrought from rational thought you will gain no ground here.

As interesting as chaos mathematics are, they probably do not a sufficiently summarize the answer to Albert Einstein's dream of a Grand Unified Theory.

Chaos has its place, but it is only [b]one of many branches[/b] of mathematics.

Calling an evolutionist a lier is declaring him a malicious creationist. Calling a creationist a lier is declaring him a malicious evolutionist.

An unbiosed searcher of truth will always initially assume that all other people act the same way.

Knowing the origin of ourselves is a philosphical question, it will never fit into natural science. So there is no experimental base which nobody can deny.

Someone could start the discussion about evolution denying Yourself. Positions and connections between atoms do not change them from beeing monkeys to beeing humans. They are the same things as before. Proof that you are not just atoms.

Have fun...(that's important)

post content is inaccessible...

[i]Oops... my bad[/i]