Evolution > Creationism

Here we go again, Pro's infatuation with “ID” (Intelligent Design). I answered Pro's selection of Bejan's quotes, where I find no reference to ID, and after looking over those quotes a second time, I'll stated it again, there are no references to ID from Bejan!!! In fact, in Round 2 I linked to a television episode from the Science channel “Through the Wormhole” series where Bejan is on record answering “NO” to the question about the constructal law being signs of a Creator. And on the “citations” issue, I gave Pro a list of Bejan's work having over 50,000 (fifty thousand) citations (https://scholar.google.com...). Please click on that link and see all the articles from various journals and the books he published and all those citations, over fifty thousand (50,000). If I had more space here on Debate.org I would list them all (journals and books) adding up to over 50,000 citations to stress the point. Actually, Pro put forward little to no science embracing his argument on the “theory of evolution” debating my [Con] position on the unified law of evolution known as the constructal law. If ID is Pro's defense, this debate “Category” belongs in “Religion” or “Philosophy” not “Science.” While Pro is stuck on ID, for the benefit of those who are critiquing this debate, please allowed me to demonstrate the unifying nature of the constructal law. “Through the Wormhole” series (http://www.youtube.com...) we learned those tree and vascularized patterns found throughout nature are the footprint of the constructal law part of thermodynamics. Since thermodynamics is a “first principle” law, means, it applies to everything in nature. Again, we are a product of the physical laws of nature. A law of physics is a concise statement that summarizes a phenomenon that occurs in nature. A phenomenon is a fact, circumstance or experience that is apparent to the human senses and can be described. The phenomenon throughout evolutionary organization facilitates access for everything that flows, evolves, spreads and is collected: river basins, atmospheric, ocean currents, biology, electron flow, gas flow, thermal gradients, the migration of technology, which includes the evolution of man and machine, wealth, economics and culture, etc. As Adrian Bejan stated in his book “Design in Nature” (https://www.amazon.com...): “Good ideas travel and persist. They keep on traveling. This is why culture is a constructal design [the constructal law]—a tapestry of morphing linkages in our minds and on the globe—all superimposed on the same area (the globe) and in the same volume (the brain). As such, culture is the same kind of design as the tapestry of vascular architectures, animate and inanimate, all superimposed on the Earth's surface.”Take for example, throughout the ages the flow of information seeking the path of least resistance, morphing into configuration resulting in a vascularized network known as the internet. And here we are on debate.org. What would our cave dwelling ancestors think about such evolution? Relative to information flow a new field is on the horizon known as Constructal Infonomics (http://constructalinfonomics.org...). Perhaps, future generations of scholars in the political and social sciences may apply the constructal law in the evolution of governance, helping to make this world a better place to live, moving further from the Dark Ages summarized in the following article: (http://www.westernfreepress.com...) Take for example Leonard E. Read's 1958 essay in the following short YouTube presentation about a pencil's genealogy (note, 1958 is well before constructal law's discovery). The essay covers the “spontaneous order” (Friedrich Hayek) found in free market systems. Read's reference to Adam Smith's celebrated phrase of an “invisible hand” at the end, is the physical constructal law in action no longer a philosophy in economics but part of the laws of nature. Notice the treelike and vascularized patterns are also the footprint of the physical constructal law, while this law unequivocally anchors economics to the physical laws of nature; unbeknownst to many economist today (http://www.youtube.com...). I could go on with examples, but I'll stop here. Pro can't deny the activity in the scientific community over this relative new discovery of a fundamental law, an outgrowth of the laws of thermodynamics, describing a unified principle for all evolution. While Pro continues to lament over ID, for those of us who find the topic of evolution interesting, should be extremely excited about such a discovery that unifies evolution throughout nature. To expand on Pro's narrow focus on biology in the evolution of organisms changing over time. In this debate, biological organisms includes the morphing of linkages within the mind of Pro and perhaps, within the minds of those who critique this debate, forming new vascularize linkages of neurons in their brain in the evolution of understanding evolution or the debate thereof. Understanding becomes the freedom from the resistance in the struggle to understand (“Hi-5 for learning”).I realize this profound relationship is a hard pill to swallow, over a simple concept pertaining to the freedom of flow seeking the path of least resistance morphing the universe into configuration from pure energy flow at the beginning of time.