View a recent day: August 20 | August 19 | August 18 | previous days | by month and year

Friday, July 6, 2007

Intelligent design proponents champion Steorn's perpetual motion device


Over at ScienceBlogs, Orac reports that creationists are pointing to Steorn's alleged free energy device (which
failed at its public unveiling two days ago, incidentally) as proof that "ultra-materialists scientists" are wrong about the laws of thermodynamics. According to the creationists, the fact that Steorn has claimed to have built a perpetual motion machine proves that evolution is bunk, too. Who can argue with logic like that?

Here's the comment from the creationist:

This is perhaps the best physical evidence I have ever seen against the absurd assumptions of materialism. The materialists are utterly convinced that "free energy" is impossible, but they have totally ignored well documented evidence of miracles (e.g. walking on water, reviving the dead).

Let me explain: Such acts would have required a great deal of energy brought in from apparently nowhere. The laws of thermodynamics as Hawkings understand them say this can never happen. In hawking's world-view reviving the dead is impossible because a long-dead body contains a great deal more entropy than a healthy living body. On the other hand, well documented evidence says these miricales happened. As scientists we must follow this evidence wherever it leads.

This is a perfect example of how ultra-materialists scientists deny legitimate scientific inquiry. It's hardly surprising that the dogmatic neo-darwinist nay-sayers are often the same people who deny that Steorn's perpetual motion machine is possible WITHOUT EVEN SEEING IT!

Link

Previously on Boing Boing:
Steorn has "technical difficulties" with "free energy" machine
Steorn's "free energy machine" to be unveiled today
More on "free energy" company
Company claims to have generator with more than 100% efficiency

Reader comment:

Jeremy says:

I find it funny that ID people are against the Laws of Thermodynamics considering they often use one of them, specifically the second law, as evidence against evolution in the first place.


posted by Mark Frauenfelder at 12:24:06 PM permalink | Other blogs' comments


View a recent day: August 20, 2007 | August 19, 2007 | August 18, 2007 | August 17, 2007 | August 16, 2007 | August 15, 2007 | August 14, 2007 | previous days | all BB archives by month and year

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):