Little bit late, I was avoiding ATS for a while
Originally posted by purplemer
what is allowing evolution to take place.
Genetics, mostly. Sexual reproduction helps, but isn't strictly necessary.
What causes the shift from disorder to order.
Actually Evolution is a process of increased
disorder. The more generations, the more mutations, the more species, then the more genuses. All
through it things are living, dying, breeding, eating, surviving, crapping, drinking, and making who knows how many smells and sounds.
A point of perfect order would be a lifeless planet, or a planet with only a single unchanging species, each following the exact same outline as those
that went before... which isn't very "lively," is it? They'd probably qualify more as a form of mineral.
I understand you're trying to shoehorn the laws of thermodynamics into this subject - I've seen it often enough. But nowhere on earth will you find
the "closed system" needed for the entropic decay found in those laws.
Evolution is a process and that process requires movement.
Or at least some form of dispersal.
Science is a belief system not unlike religion. Its puts your view of the universe in a box.
It can be called a "belief system," insasmuch that I believe that if I do something (say, mixing baking soda and vinegar) and get a result (a moment
of froth as carbonic acid is formed, decays, releases carbon dioxide and leaves a solution of sodium acetate and water,) and 999 other people do the
exact same thing to get the same result, then it's my belief that the 1001st person, doing the same thing, will ALSO get the same result.
Religion is believing that I and nine hundred and ninety-nine other people can mix baking soda to get carbon dioxide and a water / sodium acetate
slush, but that the 1,001st person
might produce a mouse. To a religious mind, each of these chemical reactions is a unique and
independently-created reaction devised at the whim of some other being. Therefor I might get CO2 / H2O+NaOAc in my science experiment, but if god
wills it, performing the experience might set YOU on fire, and madnessinmysoul over there might get a chemical that turns everything it touches into
bacon.
Science is
very much unlike religion.
Cannot you not see the limitations of science, when the one thing science cannot prove is the existence of consciousness.
And what makes you think consciousness is real? Much like the flat earth, geocentrism, and the thought that the heart is important to emotions,
consciousness is actually an illusion caused by our limited awareness of our own existence - which is kind of ironic, but true. If we had full
awareness of our own bodies, then what we call "consciousness" would be exposed as nothing more than a fairly random pattern of chemical secretions
and reactions with resultant electrical charges.
Think of it this way. Our consciousness is like this picture:
blogs.riverfronttimes.com...
To our perception, it's a coherent picture of a puppy.
In reality it's several million colored dots that are produced by a layer of molecules aligned between two transparent electrodes and two polarizing
filters, the axes of transmission of which are (in most of the cases) perpendicular to each other, all backlit with a fluorescent light. (At least for
me, dunno if you use a LCD monitor)
Why do you see a puppy instead of a blob of colored dots? Or a spray of angled photons? because it's easier for your brain to handle that that blob of
dots resembles a puppy, when in fact it looks NOTHING like a puppy. It's your brain taking a shortcut, arranging the information it's receiving from
your eye into something that might be useful to you, and therefor you say "Awwww, cute puppy!"
In the same way, it's easier for our minds to handle the concept of "consciousness" rather than acknowledge the chemical and electrical reactions that
are really going on; pay attention to the great and mighty Oz, not all the technicians, actors, grips, set producers, casting directors, special
effects guys, and editors behind the curtain.
The only thing you truly know to exist.... your consciousness. Science cannot prove
Does that not tell you something.
It tells me you have a weak understanding of both science and consciousness, yes.
edit on 2-12-2010 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason
given)
