Re: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Ye Old One <usenet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:02:00 GMT
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 05:49:02 -0800 (PST), Evopeach
<keaton1943@xxxxxxxxx> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 29, 4:39 am, Ye Old One <use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:53:15 -0800 (PST), Evopeach
<keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 28, 6:34 pm, Ye Old One <use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:32:10 -0800 (PST), Evopeach
<keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:55 pm, rich hammett <bubbaric...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Evopeach:
At least I can differentiate between deterministic processes and
events and those that are the result of random processes.
Natural selection has zero predictive power because it has random
input "signals" and depends on a filtering schema composed of random
operators/pressures which are apriori totally unpredictable.
What is an example of a "deterministic process" in your world?
Specifically one that does not have a random mechanism somewhere
underneatch it.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ Barry Goldwater: "Every good Christian should line up
\ and kick Jerry Falwell's ass."
Let's agree to ignore the quantum mechanical level of physical
activity first...avoiding your trick question.
Deterministic will be defined as a process whose result is capable of
being predicted based on its current state and input...having a
repeatably predictable cause and effect between input and output based
on observation of intrinsic state variables....at the macroscopic
level of observation and measurement.
Fresh water at room temperature put into my fully functional
refrigerator freezer trays and left overnight will repeatably and
predictively change into its solid state...ice, at or below 32 degrees
F. by the next morning.
Good example. Yes, you get ice [1] but you cannot predict exactly how
the ice forms, that is down to random events.
In the same way we can predict evolution will happen, we just cannot
predict exactly how it would happen.
[1] Actually, once in a very blue moon, you will just get super cooled
water.
--
Bob.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
At standard conditions at sea level as described how would I ever get
super cooled water in my fridge trays?
Oh dear, are you really that ignorant of science? Yes, of course you
are, you are a creationist.
Ok, educated yourself:-
http://f0rked.com/articles/supercooling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercooling
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3R4VAdCbTg
--
Bob.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Again I see its impossible to talk rationally to you people.
Well don't blame us for your inability to talk rationally.
First I am quite aware of crystallization processes, seed crystals,
etc. and phase treansitions.
Well you are now. I'm glad I was able to advance your education a
little.
First in my example of making ice at home in my frig precisely zero of
the conditions you suggest would EVER apply:
Oh!
Ordinary tapwater will always have some impurity for crystal growth.
Since, in general, tap water has a lot less mineral impurities than
bottled water....
The cooling rate is likely not adequate in a freezer compartment.
And you know this how?
The container surface is not "smooth glass" but rather rough to cause
a crystallization surface.
Do you have an icebox example, in my context, or just very purified
bottled water in smooth glass bottles well below zero.
I have given you example that proved, beyond all reasonable doubt,
that you didn't know what you were talking about.
Those vodka cubes in your box don't count.
--
Bob.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Evopeach
- Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: rich hammett
- Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Evopeach
- Re: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Evopeach
- Re: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- From: Evopeach
- Re: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- Prev by Date: Re: Seeking Creationists' definition of Creationism
- Next by Date: Re: Re: The Reasonable Minority
- Previous by thread: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- Next by thread: Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|