Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

jaimehlers



    Posts: 4837
  • Darwins +557/-17

Not only that, but he doesn't really understand what he's posting.  He sees something biology-related and acts like it's proof positive of his belief (usually because it's complex), then he goes around and shows it to everyone without taking the time to learn about what he's posting.  He's like the 9/11 truthers, or the Barack Obama birthers - absolutely convinced that what he already believes is the truth, and unwilling to even consider that it might not be.  Nope, to him, every piece of evidence points to his 'truth' even when it doesn't to anyone else, and like Don Quixote, he's sure that he'll win the next one even though he's lost every single one up till now.

All of his arguments boil down to incredulity.  He can't believe that he could be wrong, so he blithely proceeds as if he hasn't been shown to be wrong dozens of times, and keeps making a bigger and bigger fool of himself.

Just to pick out one example from this drive-by copy-pasta he just posted, his argument that ATP is somehow 100% efficient.  Actually, it isn't.  It's like in those Star Trek episodes where they talk about going above 100% efficiency - what they mean is compared to what the device (whatever it is) is rated to output.  In this case, F1-ATPase produces work that's close to the amount of energy provided by hydrolysis of an ATP molecule (it consumes more energy than it produces, but not by much).  So yes, it is efficient, but that proves nothing except that it is efficient.  Efficiency by itself does not prove that something was designed.  Yet he would have everyone believe that it was designed even though he has no proof of actual design - which is the 800 pound gorilla that he refuses to see.

Even worse is this "fourth-dimensional" nonsense he also posted.  What he's actually talking about is quarter-power scaling - the fact, long-known in biology, that the metabolism of an animal scales upward to the 3/4 power of its mass (so an animal with 100 times the mass will have a metabolism that is 31 times as great).  This is referred to as fourth-dimensional by biologists because it acts much like they had an actual fourth dimension.  But that doesn't actually mean they extend into a "fourth dimension".  What it's referring to is the fractal networking that supplies organisms, as demonstrated on page 2 of this paper on the subject.

Notably, if you look at the 2D diagrams shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, the routes (lines) from the central source are depicted as if they are 'above' the service regions (circles), as if they were three-dimensional.  This does not actually make them three-dimensional, however.  It simply refers to the way the routes work.  Thus, the same applies for this so-called "fourth dimension".  More simply, scientists expected that metabolism and other similar things would scale to the 2/3 power, not the 3/4 power, and describing them as if they had an effective fourth dimension is a simple way to explain why they scale to the larger power.  Basically, it's an observation that's easy to see but hard to explain.

As this paper relates, before Kleiber, biologists thought that metabolism would scale to the 2/3 power of mass since they metabolize through two dimensions but have to supply a three-dimensional body.  Since Kleiber showed that it actually scaled to the 3/4 power, it's easier for scientists to describe it as if it had an extra metaphysical spatial dimension.  But that does not mean that there's any kind of transcendental higher dimension actually involved.  Scientists are trying to figure this problem out; yet if Godexists and others of his ilk had their way, this would stand as absolute proof of design, without any further work done (or likely allowed) to find a different model.

For example, the paper I just linked has an interesting hypothesis known as space-lifetime, that organisms exchange energy with the environment in three dimensions (two spatial, one time) and supply their own structures in four dimensions (three spatial, one time).  Specifically, generational time, the amount of time it takes a mother organism to produce a daughter organism.  This works because it is a dimension of time that is highly meaningful to organisms.  More to the point, if you have a group of organisms that all have the same generational time, they would effectively increase metabolism by the 2/3 power of size, which we can easily observe in actual organisms of the same species.  As the paper states, "This prediction is in complete agreement with the well-known observation that intraspecific scaling exponents for metabolism are often different than interspecific exponents and tend to be closer to 2/3 than to 3/4".

In short, chalk this latest post by Godexists up to his lack of knowledge about biology and his unwillingness to consider anything except what he already believes to be true, rather than him finding any "smoking guns".
Changed Change Reason Date
SevenPatch Great points! February 11, 2014, 06:31:53 PM