Skip to comments.How Evolutionists Misunderstand Entropy
Posted on 11/20/2009 6:40:11 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
It has always amazed me how unconcerned evolutionists seem to be about entropy and the problems it poses both for a natural origin of life and for macroevolution. The argument from entropy is one of the most powerful arguments against the spontaneous formation of life from a random association of non-living chemicals...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationresearch.org ...
How is a 2008 article “News”? How is entropy applicable to a non-closed system?
That was written by someone who understands what the word “entropy” means, but not how it works.
wow this is old...
How is entropy applicable to a non-closed system?
Same as they misunderstand everything. Reality refutes evolution, so it has to be re-understood.
Galileo, Copericus and Kepler had the same problems. If you would like to see another example of this kind of "logic", go over to Digg.com and read the gibberings of the Global Warming Ardents over the E-mails that came out yesterday.
Aside from the obvious sources of external energy one must also quantify the affect of natural selection as in input and feedback path into the equation. Creationists present an incomplete equation and then attempt to use it as proof to refute science. God certainly created life and guided its ascent, but the process He used wasn't crossing His arms and nodding His head like Genie or wiggling His nose like Samantha Stevens.
The secret is out! lmao
Not at all...they only let paid subscribers read current year issues. The 2009 issues will not be available until 2010 for the general public. Not a bad deal compared to most journals, who never let the general public see a word without shelling out copious amounts of $$$.
Creationsts (of my own stripe) sometimes make the mistake of saying the the 2nd law (”entropy law,” as it were)”disproves” evolution. This is not true, because an evolutionist can always make some sort of rescue dodge. For example, they might perhaps suggest that entropy has gone up and down in the past, cyclically. The problem is, evolutionary dogma is so plastic it cannot explain anything.
Yes, the earth is an open system; but simple raw, “unintelligent” energy will not assemble life, just as an energetic bull will not stack dishes by expending that energy willy-nilly in a china shop. Energy can bring order only if there is some sort of conversion device, and the conversion device itself would be very complicated.
It would be correct,however, to say that the 2nd Law does, at least, present tremendous problems for one who is defending the evolutionary position
“How is entropy applicable to a non-closed system?:
There IS no non-closed system since we have only one universe. The universe is a system and it is in indeed closed...
Did you read this section of the article?
“Entropy is not a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics ... Entropy is much broader than the second law of thermodynamics.”
Then quantify the enthalpy in your so-called closed system. Jeez, I hate it when people who can't even balance their own checkbooks challenge the calulus of evolution.
The energy provided by our sun has kept the second law of thermodynamics at bay within our local solar system so far.