Wings

[Mark Walker]

Well, since I'm missing the point, what's the point in arguing it?

I agree with you - the energy source is the Son.

Mark.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	DR. JAMES ADAMS [SMTP:jadams at carpet.dalton.peachnet.edu]
> Sent:	Friday, September 11, 1998 5:32 AM
> To:	MWalker at gensym.com; Leps-l at lists.yale.edu
> Subject:	RE: Wings
> 
> Dear listers/Mark,
> 
> Doug wrote:
> 
> > >By the same logic you are using to naysay evolution, you
> > can naysay life itself, which is ALL anti-entropic. 
> 
> Mark responded:
>  
> > Yep, I totally agree.  In fact, that is precisely my point.  Life itself
> is
> > in conflict with entropy.  Therefore there MUST be a guiding external
> force
> > at work to sustain it.  Without this force, life would be nay-sayed.
> It's a
> > good thing that isn't the case, otherwise our email would stop working.
> 
> But you again miss the point.  The earth's ecosystem, as Doug so 
> sternly pointed out, is not *closed*.  There *is* a constant source 
> of energy being provided to it from the *sun*.  Life is not 
> anti-entropic, nor did Doug say it was.  He simply said that, 
> following *your* logic, life would be anti-entropic.  No laws of 
> physics have been violated by anything life does, since there is a 
> constant supply of energy being provided.  If you were around in 
> several billion years to watch the sun go "giant" and then "dwarf", 
> you would really understand just how much under the "control" of 
> entropy we all are here on Earth.
> 
>            Oh, and sorry that you haven't seen much in the way of 
> bugs recently.  Not much happening here either, though I did see the 
> first Monarch coming through here yesterday, the first one I've seen 
> in months.
> 
>           James