19 Nov 14
Originally posted by ZahlanziYou don't seem to understand that we live in a closed system created by God. What scientist claims our sun will last forever?
The argument that the second law of thermodynamics contradicts evolution betrays a lack of understanding of said law. It only applies to a closed system, which our planet is not as it constantly receives energy from the sun.
19 Nov 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI did not say that is what does it. However, some claim the Earth is an open system because it receives energy from the sun, which is a ridiculous idea anyway, so I just mentioned that to put aside that misconception. You can ignore that portion if it does not apply to your beliefs.
Why would the finite life time of the Sun make the Earth a closed thermodynamic system?
19 Nov 14
Originally posted by RJHindsOh maven of science, why is it ridiculous?
I did not say that is what does it. However, some claim the Earth is an open system because it receives energy from the sun, which is a ridiculous idea anyway, so I just mentioned that to put aside that misconception. You can ignore that portion if it does not apply to your beliefs.
19 Nov 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsIt's a ridiculous idea that the Earth receives energy from the Sun? A closed thermodynamic system means that no particles or energy can either leave or enter the system. This is clearly not the case with the Earth. The Earth radiates energy, loses atmosphere, gets hit by the odd meteorite, and absorbs energy from the sun and cosmic rays. It is definitely not a closed thermodynamic system. Not that this matters to the YEC evolution debate as I don't see that thermodynamics has much to tell us about the veracity or otherwise of the theory of evolution.
I did not say that is what does it. However, some claim the Earth is an open system because it receives energy from the sun, which is a ridiculous idea anyway, so I just mentioned that to put aside that misconception. You can ignore that portion if it does not apply to your beliefs.
19 Nov 14
Originally posted by DeepThought"Not that this matters to the YEC evolution debate as I don't see that thermodynamics has much to tell us about the veracity or otherwise of the theory of evolution."
It's a ridiculous idea that the Earth receives energy from the Sun? A closed thermodynamic system means that no particles or energy can either leave or enter the system. This is clearly not the case with the Earth. The Earth radiates energy, loses atmosphere, gets hit by the odd meteorite, and absorbs energy from the sun and cosmic rays. It is defini ...[text shortened]... t thermodynamics has much to tell us about the veracity or otherwise of the theory of evolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
some yecs use it to state that no higher life forms could have evolved on earth because entropy.
that is why i started this thread. this argument is flawed because earth is not a closed system.
20 Nov 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe ridiculous idea is not that the earth receives energy from the sun, everyone knows that happens. It is ridiculous to think that makes the earth an open system because the sun is also under the Second Law of thermodynamics and will eventually lose all its energy because it is also within a closed system. The Second law has never been tested in an open system, which is unknown to exist by modern science.
It's a ridiculous idea that the Earth receives energy from the Sun? A closed thermodynamic system means that no particles or energy can either leave or enter the system. This is clearly not the case with the Earth. The Earth radiates energy, loses atmosphere, gets hit by the odd meteorite, and absorbs energy from the sun and cosmic rays. It is defini ...[text shortened]... t thermodynamics has much to tell us about the veracity or otherwise of the theory of evolution.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
20 Nov 14
Originally posted by RJHindsThe internal combustion engine is really a closed system, by the same token, and the energy input it can't receive from the outside, but does receive somehow, will eventually run out, so you see: it's impossible for an engine to run, by virtue of the second law of thermodynamics. If you see engines actually running, you are hallucinating, because they can't run. They're closed systems, see?
The ridiculous idea is not that the earth receives energy from the sun, everyone knows that happens. It is ridiculous to think that makes the earth an open system because the sun is also under the Second Law of thermodynamics and will eventually lose all its energy because it is also within a closed system. The Second law has never been tested in an open system, which is unknown to exist by modern science.
But, of course they're not. You saying earth is a closed system, doesn't in fact make it so. Yes, in the end, the entire universe will run out of gas, but that is no argument against evolution. The engine of evolution runs just fine as long as the sun keeps providing energy.
20 Nov 14
Originally posted by C HessEveryone seems to be trying to build strawman arguments to counter the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I never said the second law makes an internal combustion engine run, but it will eventually stop it from running by eventual parts failure even if you keep adding the gasoline.
The internal combustion engine is really a closed system, by the same token, and the energy input it can't receive from the outside, but does receive somehow, will eventually run out, so you see: it's impossible for an engine to run, by virtue of the second law of thermodynamics. If you see engines actually running, you are hallucinating, because they can't r ...[text shortened]... nst evolution. The engine of evolution runs just fine as long as the sun keeps providing energy.
Just like the internal combustion engine needs a designer and source of energy to run so do living systems. Just as new designs to an engine do not come about by just adding gasoline, neither do new living species come about from sunshine.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
20 Nov 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsEarth . is . not . a . closed . system.
Everyone seems to be trying to build strawman arguments to counter the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I never said the second law makes an internal combustion engine run, but it will eventually stop it from running by eventual parts failure even if you keep adding the gasoline.
Just like the internal combustion engine needs a designer and source of energy ...[text shortened]... not come about by just adding gasoline, neither do new living species come about from sunshine.
If earth is not a closed system, then pointing out that eventually the entire universe runs out of gas, or that maybe evolution could stop still for some other reason, is an irrelevant point to make.
Eventually, the combustion engine stops, for whatever reason. So? Does that mean that the engine never ran, and is not currently running?
No, to suggest that it does would be silly. You are being silly. The second law of thermodynamics is completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not the process of evolution can be, have been or is in effect.
20 Nov 14
Originally posted by C HessAn internal combustion engine could be considered an open system as long as someone is adding gasoline and replacing parts that are deteriorating. But if it is left to itself it should be considered a closed system. That is the same reasoning for the earth, which has the sun to provide energy.
Earth . is . not . a . closed . system.
If earth is not a closed system, then pointing out that eventually the entire universe runs out of gas, or that maybe evolution could stop still for some other reason, is an irrelevant point to make.
Eventually, the combustion engine stops, for whatever reason. So? Does that mean that the engine never ran, and is ...[text shortened]... nt to the question of whether or not the process of evolution can be, have been or is in effect.
Naturalistic Evolutionism requires that physical laws and atoms organize themselves into increasingly complex and beneficial, ordered arrangements. Evolutionism claims that over billions of years everything is basically developing UPWARD, becoming more orderly and complex. However, this basic law of science (2nd Law of Thermodynamics) says the opposite. The pressure is DOWNWARD, toward simplification and disorder.
No experimental evidence disproves it, say physicists G.N. Hatspoulous and E.P. Gyftopoulos:
"There is no recorded experiment in the history of science that contradicts the second law or its corollaries…"
"Of all the statements that have been made with respect to theories on the origin of life, the statement that the Second Law of Thermodynamics poses no problem for an evolutionary origin of life is the most absurd… The operation of natural processes on which the Second Law of Thermodynamics is based is alone sufficient, therefore, to preclude the spontaneous evolutionary origin of the immense biological order required for the origin of life." (Duane Gish, Ph.D. in biochemistry from University of California at Berkeley)
"It is probably no exaggeration to claim that the laws of thermodynamics represent some of the best science we have today. While the utterances in some fields (such as astronomy) seem to change almost daily, the science of thermodynamics has been noteworthy for its stability. In many decades of careful observations, not a single departure from any of these laws has ever been noted." (Emmett Williams, Ph.D)
What actually happens when a dead plant receives energy from the Sun? The internal organization in the plant decreases; it tends to decay and break apart into its simplest components. The heat of the Sun only speeds the disorganization process.
Creation of living things involves the process of having design and purpose. Evolution is a directionless process having no design purpose. But the design and purpose of living things is stored by instruction information within its genes. Only by the addition of this directional information can these living things use energy and matter to produce order and complexity. Creationists believe this information could not have gotten there by an evolution accident, but must have been designed and placed in the plant and its seed by a purposeful creator in the original creations.