Creationist Lies
- Started
- Last post
- 827 Responses
- discipler0
Kuz, you are simply repackaging the old "open/closed system" argument! That's all your data is communicating - I've read it thoroughly. It's just not using the terms: open and closed systems. What you're saying is bunk.
- Kuz0
i'll say this slowly....
the spontaneous formation of millions of far more complex compounds than their elements is energetically favored by the second law. This is true whether the new molecule is more or less complicated than its starting materials because the second law is concerned only with energy. All other requirements or consequences are not within the purview of the law.
- Kuz0
omg good discipler, the simple fact that you posted all that nonsense that i JUST ANSWERED, proves to me you are not reading a SINGLE WORD of what i'm posting.
You tell me to go to your crazy christian sites but can't even read what i post... pah.. you're the reason we go in circles
- Kuz0
BUT THAT'S JUST IT DICKIPLER!
The second law is not about universal loss of usable energy over time!!!!!
omg! that is a fundamental miswording/deliberate lie of creationists website!
listen again...
the second law is a tendency, not an instantly effected edict. Its predictions might not come true for millions or billions of years. These kinds of delay are due to the second law being obstructed and hindered by what chemists call "activation energies". All the biochemicals in our bodies except inorganic substances are protected and kept from oxidation or other disastrous reaction by activation energies. Almost all the materials from which our orderly prized artifacts are made are similarly kept from rapid oxidation in air. The second law is a powerful generality, but it is often blocked (to our human advantage) in chemical substances, chemical reactions, and physical events in everyday life.
see???
- TheTick0
Coming soon to a theater near you:
Creationist Lies: The Movie
- Kuz0
Now don't you feel stupid? I hope you and your websites will just just shut the fuck up... WATCH!
it is fallacious to view the second law as a predictor of disorder. The second law concerns energy, not patterns of objects. The second law states that energy tends not to be restricted to one or a few energy levels in atoms and molecules, but to be dispersed to as many such levels as possible – rephrased in homely terms involving molecules, "Intense or concentrated energy tends to spread out and diffuse".
In that spreading-out process, macro objects sometimes are displaced and moved to random arrangements that humans subjectively define as "disorder". A violent wind not only can break a window in a building and blow the papers in an office all over a square mile, but also destroy the building itself. However, this is an incidental consequence of dispersing and spreading out of the energy in a tornado, not an event that is due to the innate nature or behavior of inanimate objects themselves in the absence of such an energy flow. Moving common objects around so they fall in disorder is a singular and accidental aspect of the universal tendency of energy to diffuse, not the general thrust or meaning or requirement of the second law that applies to objects.
- discipler0
Kuz, how does that in any way explain that fact that the second law communicates a universal loss in usable energy over time and the impact this truth has on Macroevolution???
The second law presents an insurmountable problem to the concept of a natural, mechanistic process:
1. by which the physical universe could have formed spontaneously from nothing, and
2. by which biological life could have arisen and diversified (also spontaneously) from a non-living, inanimate world. (Both postulates form essential planks in the platform of evolutionary theory in general.)
Entropy is a measure of :
1. the amount of energy unavailable for work within a system or process, and/or 2. the probability of distribution or randomness [disorder] within a system.
"The classic evolutionist argument used in defending the postulates of evolutionism against the second law goes along the lines that “the second law applies only to a closed system, and life as we know it exists and evolved in an open system.”
The basis of this claim is the fact that while the second law is inviolate in a closed system (i.e., a system in which neither energy nor matter enter nor leave the system), an apparent limited reversal in the direction required by the law can exist in an open system (i.e., a system to which new energy or matter may be added) because energy may be added to the system.
Now, the entire universe is generally considered by evolutionists to be a closed system, so the second law dictates that within the universe, entropy as a whole is increasing. In other words, things are tending to breaking down, becoming less organized, less complex, more random on a universal scale. This trend (as described by Asimov above) is a scientifically observed phenomenon—fact, not theory.
The evolutionist rationale is simply that life on earth is an “exception” because we live in an open system: “The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things.” This supply of available energy, we are assured, adequately satisfies any objection to evolution on the basis of the second law.
But simply adding energy to a system doesn’t automatically cause reduced entropy (i.e., increased organized complexity, or “build-up” rather than “break-down”). Raw solar energy alone does not decrease entropy—in fact, it increases entropy, speeding up the natural processes that cause break-down, disorder, and disorganization on earth (consider, for example, your car’s paint job, a wooden fence, or a decomposing animal carcass, both with and then without the addition of solar radiation).
Speaking of the general applicability of the second law to both closed and open systems in general, Harvard scientist Dr. John Ross (not a creationist) affirms:
“...there are no known violations of the second law of thermodynamics. Ordinarily the second law is stated for isolated [closed] systems, but the second law applies equally well to open systems ... there is somehow associated with the field of far-from equilibrium phenomena the notion that the second law of thermodynamics fails for such systems. It is important to make sure that this error does not perpetuate itself.”
[Dr. John Ross, Harvard scientist (evolutionist)]So, what is it that makes life possible within the earth’s biosphere, appearing to “violate” the second law of thermodynamics?
The apparent increase in organized complexity (i.e., decrease in entropy) found in biological systems requires two additional factors besides an open system and an available energy supply. These are:
1. A “program” (information) to direct the growth in organized complexity
2. A mechanism for storing and converting the incoming energy.
Each living organism’s DNA contains all the code (the “program” or “information”) needed to direct the process of building (or “organizing”) the organism up from seed or cell to a fully functional, mature specimen, complete with all the necessary instructions for maintaining and repairing each of its complex, organized, and integrated component systems. This process continues throughout the life of the organism, essentially building-up and maintaining the organism’s physical structure faster than natural processes (as governed by the second law) can break it down.
Living systems also have the second essential component—their own built-in mechanisms for effectively converting and storing the incoming energy. Plants use photosynthesis to convert the sun’s energy into usable, storable forms (e.g., proteins), while animals use metabolism to further convert and use the stored, usable, energy from the organisms which compose their diets.
So we see that living things seem to “violate” the second law because they have built-in programs (information) and energy conversion mechanisms that allow them to build up and maintain their physical structures “in spite of” the second law’s effects (which ultimately do prevail, as each organism eventually deteriorates and dies).
While this explains how living organisms may grow and thrive, thanks in part to the earth’s “open-system” biosphere, it does not offer any solution to the question of how life could spontaneously begin this process in the absence of the program directions and energy conversion mechanisms described above—nor how a simple living organism might produce the additional new program directions and alternative energy conversion mechanisms required in order for biological evolution to occur, producing the vast spectrum of biological variety and complexity observed by man.
In short, the “open system” argument fails to adequately justify evolutionist speculation in the face of the second law. Most highly respected evolutionist scientists (some of whom have been quoted above with care—and within context) acknowledge this fact, many even acknowledging the problem it causes the theory to which they subscribe. "
- TheTick0
This thread is unstoppable. It devours whole continents in it's maw.
It is a force of nature. Whether that is nature guided by science or god is but nought for us to know...
A tiny Tick in a vast universe..
- Kuz0
see discpler? see??!!
Energetically, the second law of thermodynamics favors the formation of the majority of all known complex and ordered chemical compounds directly from their simpler elements. Thus, contrary to popular opinion, the second law does not dictate the decrease of ordered structure by its predictions. It only demands a "spreading out" of energy when such ordered compounds are formed spontaneously.
- Kuz0
Popular statements such as "the second law says that all systems fundamentally tend toward disorder and randomness" are wrong when they refer to chemistry, and chemistry precisely deals with the structure and behavior of all types of matter.
Many kinds of molecules can strike other kinds very violently and produce totally new types of molecules – another mode of formation of new complex ordered structures due to the same innate nature of atoms to form strong bonds and spread out energy to the surroundings. Amino acids when simply melted with other amino acids (to make them move more rapidly) form huge new compounds. These are NOT useful or valuable proteins. The process simply illustrates the probability of the existence of complex gigantic substances in nature. Though not proteins, they are "proteinoid" in that they have hundreds to thousands of amino acid units firmly joined in the same kind of bonds that hold proteins together.
A simple example of the spontaneous behavior of elements is the reaction of hydrogen gas with oxygen (that was tragically illustrated when the Hindenburg dirigible burned in 1937). Hydrogen atoms have such a great inherent tendency to form strong bonds with oxygen to yield water that a small energy of activation, in the form of a spark affecting only a relatively few molecules, causes the two substances to start to react, resulting in an enormous evolution of energy. This is exactly as the second law predicts: some of the energy in hydrogen and oxygen tends to be spread out when the lesser-energetic water is formed. Yet, water is more complex than the simple elements and its atoms are arranged in an exact geometric pattern.
There are millions of compounds that have less energy in them than the elements of which they are composed. That sentence is a quiet bombshell. It means that the second law energetically FAVORS -- yes, predicts firmly -- the spontaneous formation of complex, geometrically ordered molecules from utterly simple atoms of elements.
- kld0
I guess you have to wake pretty early in the morrning to be the 666th poster in this thread.
Farkers.
- Kuz0
The value of the second law of thermodynamics is that it quantitatively describes the energetic aspects of the chemical elements and the compounds they form. The chemical potential energy (the enthalpy of formation) that is bound in most of the 20,000,000 known kinds of molecules is less than that in their elements. Thus, energetically , the second law says that the majority of compounds now known could spontaneously form from the corresponding elements. In complete contrast, watches or cars are not lower in thermodynamic energy than the total energy of their individual components. Therefore, the second law says that it is totally inappropriate to compare them with the behavior of chemical compounds and elements.
- Kuz0
so you see? 2nd law of thermodynamics actually is part of evolution!
oh my fuckin god!
- Kuz0
and also -
recent studies and very complex mathematical modelling and analysis have shown that the universe is, in fact, expanding, not decaying (yet - although they expect this to start happening in hundereds of billions of years from now). Not that this has any bearing whatsoever on evolution. Observe the number of bacteria and other organisms that start to grow AND MULTIPLY on a dead or dying body, for instance. In fact decay and detrimental circumstance are precisely the environmentally stressful conditions that SELECT FOR those organisms that have undergone evolution. eg. MRSA. lots of antibiotic overuse. bad for the bacteria. only those that have developed resistance survive.
this is not outdated! this is from a geneticist VERY RECENTLY!!
OMG!
- Kuz0
but that's what you are doing discipler!!!
omg! that HAS not been answered!!!
listen...
"ok first, the law is actually the relation between ENTHALPY and ENTROPY, and applying this to evolution is simply an analogy used by many lecturers to give first year biologists an idea that there is a constant battle between the need to evolve fast enough to adapt to minute changes in environmental circumstance, whilst also preventing any evolution from becoming chaotic and causing the organism to evolve beyond its environment such that it loses it's niche and the enviroment provides no support."
see??? THIS is why that trueorigins article you posted is FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED!!
YOWZA!
- discipler0
Old information that has been answered effectively, doesn't change a thing.
- discipler0
Kes, is not saying valid things. He's quoting out-dated information which has been answered already and can't communicate without being insulting and childish.
- Kuz0
no no, i'm excited! i found new information on the second law of thermodynamics he NEEDS to know!!!
gosh! this changes EVERYTHING!
- discipler0
No, Kus, I'm showing you the trueorigins article for you show to your Geneticist friend of a friend, etc... And be sure to read the PHD's correspondence on that article in the upper right hand corner.
- TheTick0
Kes...man..calm down...things have gotten heated here, but we've maintained for a few days. You had some valid things to say..don't go off into all caps land so quick...
Cool head, hot keyboard I always say...
Discipler if he plays nice take him off ignore...