[MD] The difference between a Monet and a finger painting

[Krimel]

Krimel]
No.
Life produces entropy locally. The constant influx of energy from the sun
means that this doesn't matter. There is more energy being input into the
system than entropy can suck up. On Earth there is a surplus of energy. Life
is a way of dissipating energy that is not simply reflected into space.

[Mark again]
I believe you are mistaken here Krimel.  A number of years ago I read
Schrodinger's "What is Life?"  I just went to our favorite Wiki to refresh
my memory.  Life is disorder to order, which is negative entropy.  The only
way to rectify this is to make life part of a larger system.

[Krimel]
You are correct life does decrease entropy locally. The only excuse I can
offer for the error is that I was writing late at night in a hotel bathroom
to avoid disturbing my traveling companions. 

But the point was that evolution does not violate the laws of physics as
some have claimed; some of those being members of the IRC, and Pirsig.

[Krimel]
Pirsig makes the same kind of point claiming to Baggini that scientists
don't seem to know the difference between questions of why and questions of
how. I have lost what little patience I ever had with this and would suggest
that the difference is between a meaningful and a meaningless question.

Endless "Whys" are the purview of two year olds, who are sincere, and
50-something scientists, who are going through what a professor of mine used
to call philosopho-pause. 

[Mark again] Well, Krimel, if you have lost the magic of a two year old, and
no longer ask why, that is your loss.
Asking why is part of my job as a scientist.  What in your estimation is a
meaningful question?
"What am I going to have for lunch?"

[Krimel]
It is the job of scientist in their roles as scientist to ask questions that
can be answered using the techniques of science. If we ask why is their life
on earth we can find answers in terms of the mixture of elements present on
the planet, a temperature that allow water to exist as a liquid, gas and
solid; Drakes's equation kinds of things. But if like a two year only we use
every answer we get a new excuse to ask Why? We eventually get into a
position like a parent answering a two year, where the only answer we can
give is, "Because, I say so."

With scientists at the stage of philosophopause or simple minded adults like
Platt, we get this kind of thing, "So evolution is the cause of of life?
Well, what is the cause of evolution? And, how about an answer to Pirsig's
question, "Why survive?"

Instead of "because I say so" we get "because God did it;" which is exactly
the answer ICR folks were looking for in the first place.