1 2 3
Water doesn't stop freezing at -4, it is at its highest density at +4, meaning that there is usually a patch of 4 degree water at the bottom of lakes, even if they are frozen.
And fish or the ToE doesn't have to "know" anything about that or have any input. It is something that helps fish survive to the next generation, which is the only thing that the ToE "cares" about.
5/30/2009 4:06:37 PM
No, water doesn't work that way. I should tell you how water works, but that would be a waste of my time.
5/30/2009 4:07:50 PM
5/30/2009 4:09:55 PM
Please explain your 'hovering control'. Millions of frozen Martians wish to know!
5/30/2009 4:18:43 PM
Might want to tell my freezer that.
5/30/2009 4:24:41 PM
I once saw a hovering control in a cheesy sci-fi movie. I don't even remember the name of it.
5/30/2009 4:27:52 PM
Please stop pretending you know anything about evolution.
P.S.: Your knowledge of water science is pretty shitty, too.
5/30/2009 4:27:54 PM
Darwin's Lil' Girl
This science-illiterate (and, considering how he spelt "abnormal", just plain illiterate) sounds like he would say "IAmJoseph. Joseph I am."
5/30/2009 4:32:13 PM
Ahm, water isn't the only substance to have a lower density when solid. There's also: gallium - 5.91 (solid) vs 6.095 (liquid)
bismuth - 9.78 (solid) vs 10.05 (liquid)
germanium - 5.323 (solid) vs 5.60 (liquid)
silicon - 2.3290 (solid) vs 2.57 (liquid)
So, is there a hovering control for those too?
5/30/2009 4:40:11 PM
The only mysterious factor is how you expect to be taken seriously when you say such absurd things.
Your "hovering control" is wild fantasy from an ignorant twit.
5/30/2009 4:56:00 PM
The fuckity fuck?
5/30/2009 5:01:29 PM
subject to a hovering control factor!
*spit-take* Perhaps he's confused about SALT? (which lowers freezing point of ocean water)
5/30/2009 5:04:01 PM
There is no conscious input in evolution, Of course, you seem to have avoided of conscious input yourself.[/b]
5/30/2009 5:10:36 PM
"abnOrmal"? "hovering control"?
5/30/2009 5:13:52 PM
U r rEtarDed
5/30/2009 5:15:43 PM
Water stops freezing at -4?
It's a good thing no-one told the polar ice-caps or most ports would be underwater.
5/30/2009 5:20:54 PM
Physics, chemistry AND biology fail.
Edit: Although it is fair to say that water does have some rather unusual properties when compared to other molecules. Unfortunately, this dude has a bizarre, Frankenstein understanding of those properties. :\
Xavius: It's been a while since I studied this stuff, so I can't be 100% certain of all the details, but I'll try my best. In short, water reaches its maximum density at about 4 degrees C, meaning that, unlike most (if not all, memory's a bit foggy on this one) other substances, water becomes less dense when it reaches its freezing point. Water expands as it freezes, which causes the colder, frozen bits to rise to the surface, and leaves the denser 4 degree layer of liquid water at the bottom. As you probably know, denser substances will sink to the bottom, while less dense substances rise to the top (think oil and water). It's kind of a neat phenomenon, but hardly proof that god exists. Nature is full of these kinds of seemingly-deviant properties. The fish have simply evolved to take advantage of this, just as we've evolved to take advantage of the world in which we live. These creationists fail to understand that we evolved to fit the world and the universe, the world and universe didn't evolve to fit us.
Btw, I can't for the life of me remember why water does this. Sorry.
5/30/2009 5:24:37 PM
Side comment here. Could someone link something on this? I'm not familiar with the density/temperature relation of water, and apparently my wikipedia skills are rather lacking >.>
5/30/2009 5:39:02 PM
What the hell is a "hovering control factor"?
5/30/2009 6:39:33 PM
Once again a Creationist gets agency wrong. They are looking for a conscience when none is there.
5/30/2009 6:45:08 PM
I fail to see how anything you said applies to evolution in any way at all. What does water freezing or not have to do with disproving adaptation? Your suggestion that the freezing behaviour of water is somehow subject to concious control is patently ludicrous.
There are several reasons why lakes don't easily freeze solid, but none of them have anything to do with the nonsense you are spouting. If lakes are small enough, they will freeze. However, any lake of sufficient size almost never will except in extreme cases.
The reason most lakes don't freeze solid is because ice and snow are good insulators and poor conductors of heat. The surface of the lake that is exposed to the cold winter air will freeze into ice and this ice insulates the water below from further rapid freezing.
Also aiding the prevention of bodies of water from freezing solid is an interesting characteristic of water. Like most forms of matter, water become denser as it cools down, but beginning at about 4°C water begins to expand and lose density as it gets colder. It continues to expand as it cools and becomes the least dense when it freezes into ice. This is why ice floats.
As water under the ice becomes colder it rises to the top, freezing to the bottom layer of ice and thickening it. The insulation of the water increases as the ice thickens so cooling of the water under it slows. Ordinarily snow will also be found on top of the ice which acts as an excellant insulator. Also the depth of the lake often extends below the surrounding soils frost line allowing heat transfer to the lake water to occur.
Many lakes will eventually freeze solid if given enough time, a longer winter will also extend the depth of the soil frost line. Usually though the spring thaw arrives before that happens.
Next time please keep your non-sequitur "logic" to yourself or at least do some research first.
5/30/2009 6:55:12 PM
All I see is someone who can't explain something and rather than actually research the phenomena (He know's he is smarter than those "science" geeks with their science books) so he decides to make up a mechanism by which this phenomena would happen (Because he thinks, like all the great minds, he need not be bothered by little things like research or testing.) He picks out a couple of buzzwords and then logs on to the internet to inform the world all about how things really work. (It'll be up to the science geeks to make sure that reality works the way he says it does, after all he is a mental giant and cannot waste his great talents on petty things like logoc and proof. The world needs people him who can work out all the big problems.)
5/30/2009 7:28:12 PM
Wow. This one is a complete fuck-up from beginning to end.
5/30/2009 7:32:55 PM
If all the water was -4, I don't think all the fish would live. Some fish have adapted to such low temperatures by evolving a form of antifreeze in their blood. Others survive because, as was pointed out above, a layer of +4C water forms at the bottom of a body of water if it's deep enough, which is above freezing. The fish will be pretty inactive (and won't really need to eat since their metabolism tends to depend on their temperature) but they survive. It is very highly improbable that all the fish living in the low temps could survive there in the beginning. The ones that lived/stayed 'automatically' adapted, since adaptation is not something that occurs for an individual, but for a population. The individuals that are not suited for a given environmental condition die or move; the group that's left in that environment have adapted. Adaptation is not an action, evolutionarily speaking.
5/30/2009 7:43:25 PM
Even if your "hovering control factor" existed, it would simply be another environmental condition like all the others. Living creatures would either adapt to it or go extinct--evolution in a nutshell.
You, Joseph, are a twit.
5/30/2009 7:56:31 PM
1 2 3