GreenPenInc wrote:
And let me respond to the watch analogy, too. Analogies are helpful ways of understanding things that are alike in some respects, and unlike in others. What's critical is that the comparison depends only on the
alike parts, and not any
unlike ones! Here's what I mean: evolution
absolutely requires that the things which evolve are
self-replicating, and that offspring can differ slightly from their parents. This is not remotely true of any watch I have ever seen. The analogy fails at a critical point.
If the intent is to expose a genuine flaw in the basis for evolution, I hope honesty will compel you to stop using the analogy if you've now seen how it fails.
I also wanted to respond to this. The watch analogy is actually good. Even though we can recognize the difference between organic and inorganic material, I would like to pose the question: what has conviced us that organic material can change on its own? Now we know that a baby builds up to an adult, and this would seem to indicate that the watch is much different. However, what causes the baby to grow into an adult. There is a process called cellular repiration. It is a very complicated arrangment of just the right proteins call enzymes at just the right spots that cause just the right chemical reactions to use glucose to produce what we know as ATP. ATP is chemical energy. When Phosphate is broken off, it creates energy. Fundamently, these processes refute evolution and perhaps I will explain why later. However, my point is to prove and show that the baby is not becoming more complex. The baby is making ATP so that the genetic sequence can be performed and constructed. The DNA is the same in a baby as it is when he is an adult. It is the consumption of energy that is needed to make this process happen. For every energy transfer, it adds to the entropy of the universe. I don't want to get to deep into entropy, but principally, you can't just add energy. As the case of the baby, the genetic design had to be pre-existing. No actual change occurred. All people and anything organic does is produce energy to complete a genetic sequence that was pre-exhisting. So we know that in order to decrease entopy, energy alone is insufficient. You can throw energy at the problem all day and it accomplishes nothing. I could get all the parts of a tv and ad energy to it with a baseball bat or even a large microwave, but the tv will not construct itself. You need a specific kind of energy to go from less complex to more complex. It is called an outside intelligence. Regardless of what we have chemically that makes us organic, there is a reason why a baby stops maturing at a cirtain time and enters adult hood. There is no more intellectual information being provided by DNA. Therefore, our bodies can produce all the energy it wants, but a man will not change into another creature. He stops growning when his DNA provides no more information. To suggest that DNA is going to get more complicated as years go by is to try to throw random energy at a problem that is too complex to be solved by randomness. The tv will not construct itself, nor will erosion produce a city. Entropy increases with the use of energy, and this law is not overcome in organic material as evolutionist pose. It is all the same. A watch or human. Energy can be added to the watch. It's molecular composition may change if you add enough of the right kind of energy, but it will certainly not be more complex. It will degrade and become useless. You would only increase the entropy.
