America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 20 years ago by RICKAMAVEN. 65 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
CREATIONISM OR EVOLUTION
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
passion268 Offline
#51 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 3:37 AM EST
Joined: 01-07-2003
Posts: 37
what's your take on the 2nd law of thermodynamics? It states that one of the most basic laws of science is that things in nature always tend to dissolve and breakdown, not grow more complex. Our bodies do. The bodies of every plant and animal in the world do...what's your thoughts on that?



RICKAMAVEN Offline
#52 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 4:19 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
passion268

that's not quite right. the second law of thermodynamics is

"Energy spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused or dispersed and spread out."

that has little if any effect on plants and animals mutating to adjust to their changing enviornment.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#53 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 4:24 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
CWFoster

"We are all presented with the same gospels"

no we are not. native americans, orientals, islams, and others are not even interested in jesus. he is not mentioned in their gospels.

i did not know that mary's husband, step father as you so eloquently put it, was a carpenter. (and i am not being a smart ass or sarcastic)

Cigarick Offline
#54 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 4:27 AM EST
Joined: 07-28-2002
Posts: 3,078
There is nothing in the universe that violates the second law of thermodynamics, and there's no connection between thermodynamics and evolution.

In a closed system, you're always going to lose some energy. Heat cannot pass from a colder body to a warmer body by itself. There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine.

Explain to me what any of this has to do with evolution.
CWFoster Offline
#55 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 6:40 AM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
Rick, no other faith I am aware of refers to thier holy scripts as "Gospels" reference to "carpenter" to follow
passion268 Offline
#56 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 7:07 AM EST
Joined: 01-07-2003
Posts: 37
Cigarick: I'm not trying to tell you if you're right or wrong here... maybe this will help explain where it fits in... just trying to see some people's opinions on this:


The first law of thermodynamics says that the total quantity of energy in the universe remains constant. This is the principle of the conservation of energy. The second law of thermodynamics states that the quality of this energy is degraded irreversibly. This is the principle of the degradation of energy.
Applying this knowledge to nature, physicists found that the total entropy change always increases for every naturally occurring event that could be then observed. Thus, they theorized, disorder must be continually augmenting evenly throughout the universe.

Energy in the universe is working towards a state of equilibrium. Incidentally, the process of the energy reaching equilibrium results in ordered matter becoming disordered. The consequences to our universe are fatal. Eventually, the entire universe will become disordered; the sun will fade and extinguish, man will return to dust, comets will cease to be, the gravitation of the earth will diminish to non-existence, ordered chemical matter will break down to become simpler and less ordered, our solar system will slow and stop, disorganisation of balance and precision in the universe will increase, and so on.... All ordered matter is moving from order to disorder! This is a most unfortunate reality. The simple will never produce and has never been observed to produce the more complex!

Put simply, it means that the universe is running downwards and that all natural order is going downwards. However, evolution requires to work in the opposite direction. Evolution requires to work upwards i.e. order to arise from disorder. Evolution requires the simple to produce the more complex. i.e. non living matter becoming living matter, and then microbes eventually evolving into complex living organisms, including man, and so on...

CWFoster Offline
#57 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 7:10 AM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
besides, look at the past hundred years of human development. we have overall learned more, but as a species, have largely become more stupid
Cigarick Offline
#58 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 10:21 AM EST
Joined: 07-28-2002
Posts: 3,078
You've explained thermodynamics fairly well, but it still doesn't apply to evolution.

Thermodynamics = 1. heat, 2. mechanical energy, 3. the conversion of either of these into the other, 4. and eventually getting used up.

Biology is a little more complex than that.
passion268 Offline
#59 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 11:05 AM EST
Joined: 01-07-2003
Posts: 37
I'm with you on that cigarick... I was only thinking that scientists (including bioligists) say it is the probably the single most relevant law when it comes to the workings of all natural aspects of our world. Entropy goes beyond simply being a loss of heat. So I've just been curious how one of the laws of the universe that has never otherwise been refuted could just be thrown out when it comes to the whole creation/evolution debate. That's all from me on it. Have an awesome day. I think I'm going to light up an MX2!
choner Offline
#60 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 12:11 PM EST
Joined: 02-04-2003
Posts: 876
Passion, you are totally wrong in that everything becomes simpler and not complex. The laws of thermodynamics states that there is a tendency to go towords more entropy as a whole system, yet bits and parts of that system can lose entropy just as long as the whole gains. Therefore, the system is the Universe, yet Earth is just a minute part of the whole system. You will get reactions that lose entropy, yet as long as the system as a whole gains, and we know its gains alot from burning stars. There are several reactions or events that lose entropy, such as freezing water to ice, yet it happens, it just requires some energy to do. I just wanted to clear that up, yet how does thermodynamics relate to evolution?

choner
passion268 Offline
#61 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 1:06 PM EST
Joined: 01-07-2003
Posts: 37
I think you're kind of misunderstanding me choner... it's the principles that come from the 2nd law...

The Barrier of Thermodynamics
The two laws of thermodynamics are the most universally applicable and impregnably confirmed of all laws of science. In effect, they specify conservation in quantity and tendency to decline in quality, and so provide what seems to be an impregnable barrier to "upward" evolution. Although evolutionists have tried various ways of getting around this barrier, the fact remains that no case of true upward evolution has ever been observed to occur, nor has any proposed mechanism of evolution ever been found workable, and the thermodynamic barrier provides a good explanation as to why not.

Rifkin, Jeremy, Entropy: A New World View (New York: Viking Press, 1980), 305 pp.

"Now, however, a new world view is about to emerge, one that will eventually replace the Newtonian world machine as the organizing frame of history: the Entropy Law will preside as the ruling paradigm over the next period of history. Albert Einstein said that it is the premier law of all of science: Sir Arthur Eddington referred to it as the supreme metaphysical law of the entire universe. The Entropy Law is the second law of thermodynamics. The first law states that all matter and energy in the universe is constant, that it cannot be created or destroyed. Only its form can change but never its essence. The second law, the Entropy Law, states that matter and energy can only be changed in one direction, that is, from usable to unusable, or from available to unavailable, or from ordered to disordered."
I'm not trying to prove creation here... I just want a solid answer of one natural thing in the universe that goes from disorder to order... or spoiled food that can become fresh, or rotting wood that can become strong...
It's kind of lame to say "prove evolution or prove creation, because no one can do it and everybody knows that. You just have to choose to accept something. As for me I choose to believe in a God who not only created me because he loves me but because he loves himself and wants me to have the opportunity to spend eternity loving something greater than myself... If all there was to life was to have fun for a few years and then die and everything was pointless then honestly I'm not sure how cool that would be... Ultimately, you just have to decide what you want to believe. I just decided that I have never and never will get the opportunity to see a species change but I have seen the evidence of plenty of lives changed so I'm going to stick with that. Just my .02

coda Offline
#62 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 2:26 PM EST
Joined: 07-27-2003
Posts: 623
passion,
No disrespect intended, but someone who doesn't understand the 2nd Law should not be trying to apply it. But I'll go further: someone who does understand it and intentionally distorts it to try to prove their point deserves no respect. I can't tell into which category the author you quoted falls --- but he certainly wouldn't have passed Thermo I in an accredited college with that line of thought.

"or rotting wood that can become strong... "
OK. Rotting wood from dead trees supplies nutrients that are use by new, growing trees. All natural. Recycling, driven by the energy from the sun. Strong from rotting, as you requested. For my next trick....

We humans are part of nature, and everything we do is "natural" in terms of this discussion, no matter how many cars we drive or TV's we own. We cannot violate the laws of thermodynamics if we tried. But we build the heat pump, which makes my house warmer (energy in it increases). We take randomly growing forests of trees and build neat, square houses in rows (order increases). I'll stop now. Does any of that violate the 2nd Law?

CWFoster,
I didn't forget you, and I'm glad you are content. But your response regarding your choices doesn't counter my point about not choosing our beliefs. Your choices were of _actions_, based on a belief in god which you cannot deny. Beliefs can certainly change, but are not chosen. (But thanks, I will have that cigar and contemplate life.)
choner Offline
#63 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 4:17 PM EST
Joined: 02-04-2003
Posts: 876
Passion, I understand you more then you think... I just don't think you understand the applications of the laws of thermodynamics. Have you had an indept class on Physics, chemistry, or Molecular Biology?

I'm not sure where you get your reading from, but to apply the laws of thermodynamics in such a way is completely wrong. Remember, we freeze water, which loses entropy. Expanding on Coda's theme, a seedling will take nutrients and element from the ground and form cells, and a whole entire tree, which is losing entropy and randomness as well. You must understand that every chemical reaction is reversible, if given the right conditions.

choner
ferd6 Offline
#64 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 5:16 PM EST
Joined: 10-19-2001
Posts: 1,145
I believe creationism and evolution can work together.
For God, creating man from where he began on the evolutionary chain to where he is now is like building a house. You lay down the foundation, the building blocks, you add structure and form, you modify the design plans making changes as you go along, then even when "done" you still are not done, as repairs and remodeling are a never ending thing....for God to modify anything (including man) over eons is still less time than it takes a contractor to build a storage shed in someones back yard...simplistic I know...but what is a day to God..it is not our 24 hours. Thanks for listening to another opinion.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#65 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 10:55 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
CWFoster

ok you win on the definition issue.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#66 Posted: Wed, Jan 7 2004, 10:57 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
ferd6

i like the way you think about this subject.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Back to Top