//I don't think it is enough of an explaination for the amount of life on earth, or that life began on earth to start with//

It definitely isn't. But neither is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics sufficient to disprove evolution. No physicist has yet observed a violation of the 2nd Law, which is why it remains a law. And it isn't for want of trying; if you can break the 2nd Law you can build over-unity devices (perpetual motion devices). If evolution actually did violate the 2nd Law, physicists would have been all over it some time ago.

I suspect that people who make the claim that the 2nd Law disproves evolution are working on the assumption that most people they're talking to know bugger all about thermodynamics, and thus they'll be able to hoodwink them - either that, or they just haven't properly understood the physics themselves. But those of us who proudly wear the equation S = k.log W as a tattoo feel the urge to do this whenever we hear the claim being repeated:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSvJaYxRoB4

Now go forth and sin no more.

.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

.
You wrote :

« If something is true it is unchanging »

That’s true, Not_Now.Soon, but the question is : how do we know if it is true or not ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY-2einPmd4

.

Dear Banjo,

This small-dog/large-dog example did not occur to me, perhaps because this isn't how we use "worship" in my circles. Clearly the small dog is insincere and has no true devotion, so retrospectively perhaps I should have used the word "devotion" instead?

There were times in my life when I behaved like the small dog, I still do when stopped by police or see a police car behind me, just lay low till the storm passes, but inside I feel contempt rather than adoration, had they only knew what I really think about the regime they represent...

Had the big dog ate poison and laid dying, the small dog would growl and bar his fangs, but when Socrates took poison, Plato instead worshipped him by telling the world, "Hey, this man followed my ideal, I am inspired by him and wish to acquire the same wisdom and courage as my master had"

- This is how me and my friends feel when we kneel, genuflect or prostrate in front of an image of someone, either mythical or historical, who provides us with an example of our ideal, how we aspire to live ourselves. Unlike big-dog or the police, a statue or a picture cannot see my worship or reward me for it, but it does tune my heart into what the image represents. For example, when I see an image of someone who overcame lust, whom lust no longer has any hold on, I prostrate myself and pray to attain the same.

Finally, for some people, a bit of servility and self-humiliating could in fact be a good idea - just imagine how good it could be if politicians actually listened and meant it when parliament opens with "...thy will be done on earth... for the kingdom, the power and the glory are yours..."

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

You wrote :

« This is how me and my friends feel when we kneel, genuflect or prostrate in front of an image of someone, either mythical or historical, who provides us with an example of our ideal, how we aspire to live ourselves »

Yes, that is worship. It is exactly what I intensely dislike and totally reject. It has nothing to do with love as I understand it (cf., my post to you on the top of page 21 of this thread).

It is self-demeaning, a sign of servility, submission, and self-humiliation.

As I already indicated, I have great respect for human dignity – at all times and in all circumstances.

Love is wise, worship is foolish.

With that, Yuyutsu, if you don’t mind, I think I’ll call it a day. This is evidently something we cannot agree upon.

.

To Toni.

Perhaps I don't understand the 2nd law of thermodynamics dynamics as well as you do. However, based on what I do know, the second law does cause a hole in our understanding of evolution. Not necessarily the basis of evolution that animals change. But it challenges the basis of evolution when evolution is explained as part of the start of life on earth. The theory that all life started from single cell life to develop into more complex organisms is a counter theory of the theory that over time all things erode and fall apart. There is no natural explanation of adaption and becoming a more complex species when looking at the second law of thermodynamics. It doesn't work. Or if it does you'll have to try to explain it more then just asserting that it's all good.

That said, evolution is a separate issue and has it's own holes in it that are worth considering. For thermodynamics, in order for life to exist at all and at the rate it does currently (instead of being much more barren like the other planets, moons, and comets in the solar system) then the 2nd law of thermodynamics can't apply to earth's beginnings or development. Evolution or not, why doesn't Earth look like Mars?

To Banjo.

"How do we know what is true?" 3 ways we assess the what is true and what isn't.

1) we investigate. Using our own rationale, logic, and understanding we have a great tool for finding answers, interpreting them, and finding faults in them.

2) we test the understanding. Where our understanding can fail or be justified is by our testing what we trust to be true. Sometimes it's not really a test to see the limits and test the boundaries of a theory. But instead is following a rule and a claim and applying it because you trust it. Only then to find out if it really was true or not.

3) third way we assess the truth is simply by trusting where it came from. From kids trusting their parents, to businessmen consulting an expert in a field they are trying to fix or get better with, to even just trusting a doctor with knowing your health issues and able to find solutions.

Of these three ways of assessing the truth though, experience and testing it by seeing how it went for yourself or others is what I'd count as a good source of testing what's true and what's bogus.

(Continued)