Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 223366 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#113164 May 24, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I will play....
The theory of Evolution violates The Second Law of Thermodynamics (law of increasing entropy) says that things which start out concentrated together spread out over time. If you heat one room in a house, then open the door to that room, eventually the temperature in the whole house evens out (reaches equilibrium). Knowing how far this evening-out has progressed at any point in time tells you the entropy. Entropy can measure the loss of a system's ability to do work. Entropy is also a measure of disorder, and that is where evolution theory hits an impenetrable wall. Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder. Things fall apart over time, they do not get more organized. We can overcome this by making a machine and adding energy, but the Second Law prevents such a machine from assembling spontaneously from raw materials.
So you don't really understand the second law of thermodynamics. That is understandable because the popular treatments do not typically do it justice. Yes, a gas will expand over time because of entropy effects.

On the other hand, the separation of oil and water is also driven by entropy effects. The oil and water do NOT 'spread out' because of entropy. They separate. Until you understand why that is possible, you do not understand the concept of entropy.

Next, we *never* overcome a law of nature. In particular, we can use machines and supply them with energy and produce *local* decreases of entropy, but the overall entropy will increase when we consider the whole system which also includes the machine.

In the case of the Earth, there is a *huge* energy source about 93 million miles away that drives most of the reactions involved in life. You may have heard of it; it is called the sun. And, when the energy from the sun is added into the calculation of entropy, the changes due to evolution are paltry in comparison. In particular, every single reaction involved in living things obeys the second law of thermodynamics, even when those living things are growing and forming new structure. The amount of change between generations due to evolution is dwarfed by the changes in each generation from growth and waste elimination (a huge contribution, by the way).

Next, entropy is something we can actually calculate and measure. We can follow how entropy increases for each and every chemical reaction involved in life. Simple things like mutation and selection come nowhere close to violating the second law.

So, if this is your opening salvo, it only shows the prediction you will misunderstand the science is upheld. If you want more details about the second law, go read a book on thermodynamics, and then another one on statistical mechanics. Once you do that (and I have), come back and we can talk about how the second law applies to evolution in detail.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#113165 May 24, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I will play....
The theory of Evolution violates The Second Law of Thermodynamics (law of increasing entropy) says that things which start out concentrated together spread out over time. If you heat one room in a house, then open the door to that room, eventually the temperature in the whole house evens out (reaches equilibrium). Knowing how far this evening-out has progressed at any point in time tells you the entropy. Entropy can measure the loss of a system's ability to do work. Entropy is also a measure of disorder, and that is where evolution theory hits an impenetrable wall. Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder. Things fall apart over time, they do not get more organized. We can overcome this by making a machine and adding energy, but the Second Law prevents such a machine from assembling spontaneously from raw materials.
A few more tests for your understanding of entropy:

1. What are the units of entropy?(for example, the units of velocity are distance divided by time)

2. When water freezes, does the entropy of the water increase or decrease?

3. When water freezes, does the entropy of the surrounding air increase or decrease?

4. What is the total change in entropy when 18 grams of water freezes at 0 degrees C?

5. In the decomposition of glucose by the body, how much of the energy released is due to entropy changes?

6. What is the entropy change when a peptide bond is formed between two amino acids (if you want to do specific acids, that is fine)?

7. What is the entropy change in the formation of a peptide bond when coupled (as it is) with the decomposition of ATP?

Now, if you want a *real* challenge,

8. Take any population of animals. Consider the energy balances over 2 million years and determine whether it is possible for those animals to have a net increase in, say, the size of their legs.

9. Take a population of bacteria 3.5 billion years ago on the Earth. Look at all the energy flows involved and determine whether entropy allows the development of animals over that time period.
Old Guy

Napa, CA

#113166 May 24, 2014
For Polymath257
If I understand what you’ve said, and what I’ve read, the universe is all that exists. There is no boundary to the universe because there is “nothing” beyond the universe.

Expansion of the universe is the increase in size of the universe as it continues to create itself….expansion is not objects moving away from each other. Expansion is really “growth” in the sense that the universe increases in size as new matter is created.

The concept of a “Big Bang” is misleading because it implies the movement of matter away from the center or origin of the explosion……this mental picture is inaccurate as there is no moving away from the center because there is no center.

Is inflation a better mental picture? The universe “inflated” almost instantly to full size.

As I mentioned before, I am trying to understand the concept of “nothing” as the term is used by scientists like Hawking, Mlodinow and Krauss when they speak of the universe from “nothing”. If my understanding is correct,“nothing” cannot exist…..there can be no quantum vacuum in the universe. And, if the universe is all that is, there can be no “nothing” beyond the universe.

Am I on track here?

Thanks

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#113167 May 24, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
For Polymath257
If I understand what you’ve said, and what I’ve read, the universe is all that exists. There is no boundary to the universe because there is “nothing” beyond the universe.
Expansion of the universe is the increase in size of the universe as it continues to create itself….expansion is not objects moving away from each other. Expansion is really “growth” in the sense that the universe increases in size as new matter is created.
The concept of a “Big Bang” is misleading because it implies the movement of matter away from the center or origin of the explosion……this mental picture is inaccurate as there is no moving away from the center because there is no center.
So far, you did quite well.
Is inflation a better mental picture? The universe “inflated” almost instantly to full size.
Some care is required here because the term 'inflation' is a technical term in this area of study. It describes the very fast expansion of the universe in very early times. However, that expansion happens everywhere, just like the current expansion. It also had no center. Also, it is quite possible, given what we know, that the universe was spatially infinite at all times.
As I mentioned before, I am trying to understand the concept of “nothing” as the term is used by scientists like Hawking, Mlodinow and Krauss when they speak of the universe from “nothing”. If my understanding is correct,“nothing” cannot exist…..there can be no quantum vacuum in the universe. And, if the universe is all that is, there can be no “nothing” beyond the universe.
Am I on track here?
Thanks
Very close. The 'nothing' that these physicists talk about is a state where no particles exist at all. It does, however, still obey the laws of physics and it turns out that a state where no particles exist at all is an unstable state: it actually has a higher energy content than a state of the universe *with* particles in it. So what happens is that higher energy state decays into a lower energy state with partilces with the mass of the particles coming from the difference of energy.

The rest of what you said at least passes the 'popular science' criterion for accuracy. To be more accurate would take a LOT of math.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113168 May 24, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I will play....
The theory of Evolution violates The Second Law of Thermodynamics (law of increasing entropy) says that things which start out concentrated together spread out over time. If you heat one room in a house, then open the door to that room, eventually the temperature in the whole house evens out (reaches equilibrium).... Entropy is also a measure of disorder, and that is where evolution theory hits an impenetrable wall. Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder. Things fall apart over time, they do not get more organized.
I notice, as warned before, that you have no idea of evolution theory.

Bur, above all, what a terrible tattle.
The second law of thermodynamics applies to isolated systems.
It does not apply to closed or open systems.
An open system is a system that exchanges energy and matter with its surroundings.
A closed system exchanges energy but not matter with an outside system.
An isolated system neither exchanges energy or matter with its surroundings.

The earth is an open system because it receives copious amounts of energy from the sun. Plants harvest that energy by photosynthesis. Plants are eaten by herbivores. Herbivores are eaten by carnivores. The sun's energy is the primary energy source of the chain of life.
The biosphere as such is also to be considered a system. It receives energy from the sun but also from geothermal energy.

Entropy has nothing to do with disorder. Left to themselves, all things tend to equalize their temperatures UNLESS they receive energy from outside systems. In an isolated system though, eventually everything will tend to bear the same temperature and heat will no longer be able to flow. But since we need heat flow to perform labour ,this means that no part of that isolated system will be able to do work on any other part. This state of 100% even distribution of energy is called entropy and this has nothing to do with "disorder". "Equilibrium" and "disorder" are mutually exclusive concepts.

Even your room example is flawed. A room is not an isolated system, ESPECIALLY when you open the door. It exchanges energy with the surrounding systems. When outside temperature decreases or increases, the room's also will. Even if you close the door this will happen unless you thermally insulate it 100%, which is practically impossible because we don't know of such perfect insulation materials.

If life were breaching the 2nd law, as you imply ("Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder"), I wonder how you managed to grow from a single fertilized cell into a complex organism of some billions highly organized cells. According to you this couldn't happen.

Moreover, the fossil record refutes your silly distortion of physics.
As demonstrated in my first post, you find a very particular order of fossils. Even if we don't count for exact dating, it is evident that deeper earth layers are older than those on top of them. We see no human fossils below the mid Tarantien era. We only see homo Erectus fossils and even deeper (=older) these disappear also and only Australopithecus specimen are found. This would not been possible according to you.

NOTE again that I am not talking about exact ages but ONLY the CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER in the stratification.

As a matter of fact, if you keep on digging, you eventually only find layers with micro fossils of bacterial life within them. These deepest layers are completely void of ANY OTHER fossils.

Go to http://www.oldearth.org/grandcanyon.htm . There you find the geological column of the Grand Canyon painstakingly described in 5 parts. Read them all. Mind the descriptions of the fossil record. All this is completely impossible according to you.

Note: for this reason, next time I won't accept any post WITHOUT empirical evidence any more.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113169 May 24, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I will play....
The theory of Evolution violates The Second Law of Thermodynamics (law of increasing entropy) says that things which start out concentrated together spread out over time. If you heat one room in a house, then open the door to that room, eventually the temperature in the whole house evens out (reaches equilibrium). Knowing how far this evening-out has progressed at any point in time tells you the entropy. Entropy can measure the loss of a system's ability to do work. Entropy is also a measure of disorder, and that is where evolution theory hits an impenetrable wall. Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder. Things fall apart over time, they do not get more organized. We can overcome this by making a machine and adding energy, but the Second Law prevents such a machine from assembling spontaneously from raw materials.
And, BTW, I INSIST on you answering the questions of polymath257 on entropy.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#113170 May 24, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
OK I will play....
The theory of Evolution violates The Second Law of Thermodynamics (law of increasing entropy) says that things which start out concentrated together spread out over time. If you heat one room in a house, then open the door to that room, eventually the temperature in the whole house evens out (reaches equilibrium). Knowing how far this evening-out has progressed at any point in time tells you the entropy. Entropy can measure the loss of a system's ability to do work. Entropy is also a measure of disorder, and that is where evolution theory hits an impenetrable wall. Natural processes proceed in only one direction, toward equilibrium and disorder. Things fall apart over time, they do not get more organized. We can overcome this by making a machine and adding energy, but the Second Law prevents such a machine from assembling spontaneously from raw materials.
Not the damn SLoT again??? Even AiG knows this is a crappy argument. GEEZ!
Camilla

Phoenix, AZ

#113187 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
Some typos crap. Any way the message, no matter what, has/ had been passed.
Creation, Evolution, God and
Global Warming -.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#113190 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> That is why many are called few are chosen. Even the bible said that. Many mortals will claim the status of God or god.
That you even believe yourself so much that,
It make's me laugh..

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#113191 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Boy, you are still not getting it. Despite that, science is still limited.
Why? Because humans are limited.
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> 6Origination. Are you aa stubborn he Goat?
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> It started in England. Accept that.
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Can you dictate to death when and when not to come?
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> A heart of stone. An advice, don't think like a dummy.
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Then you don't know the meaning of God. God is not god or godess.
Babble

/&#712;babel/

verb - To Babble

verb: babble; 3rd person present: babbles; past tense: babbled; past participle: babbled; gerund or present participle: babbling

1. talk rapidly and continuously in a foolish, excited, or incomprehensible way.
2. To utter a meaningless confusion of words or sounds:
3. To talk foolishly or idly; chatter
4. To make a continuous low, murmuring sound
5. To blurt out impulsively; disclose without careful consideration.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#113192 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Lol
you mean you are a robot with no feelings?
No wonder!
You don't have any evidence to base your beliefs on. You've got happy, happy joy, joy feelings for an old book that's been repeatedly proven wrong - that's like feeling you're going to win tonight's lottery that isn't being held with a fake ticket from last year.

“Up with which, I will not put”

Since: Jul 08

Sao Paulo

#113193 May 26, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have any evidence to base your beliefs on. You've got happy, happy joy, joy feelings for an old book that's been repeatedly proven wrong - that's like feeling you're going to win tonight's lottery that isn't being held with a fake ticket from last year.
Well, that's about the odds of anyone winning a lottery...
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#113194 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Boy, you are still not getting it. Despite that, science is still limited.
Why? Because humans are limited.
Bla.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113195 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Boy, you are still not getting it. Despite that, science is still limited.
Why? Because humans are limited.

Charles is a lot more limited than most.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#113196 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> God does not hide his existence. He has given to us a lot of evieence about his existence, some examples are the sun( how did it came?), moon, etc.
These things never came by accident.

Exactly how dumb are you?

You don't even know how stars and planetary objects form. Did you receive no education in your 3rd world country?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#113197 May 26, 2014
JM_Brazil wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, that's about the odds of anyone winning a lottery...
Powerball odds are around one in 80 million. As near as anyone can tell, if you had 80 billion devout Christians spread over the course of 2000 years (starting with Paul), the odds one of them will actually meet Jesus is around zero in 80 billion.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#113198 May 26, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Powerball odds are around one in 80 million. As near as anyone can tell, if you had 80 billion devout Christians spread over the course of 2000 years (starting with Paul), the odds one of them will actually meet Jesus is around zero in 80 billion.

But they seen each other in a dream!

Since: Apr 14

San German, Puerto Rico

#113199 May 26, 2014
PROFESSOR X wrote:
<quoted text>
I know ... but someones got to help him get back to reality. It's not an accident that Darwin's theory is defended more by books and movies of science-FICTION than the scientific evidence. Too bad many of these scientist hide behind their degrees and unproven press releases in order to create the illusion of being authoritative, meanwhile they are busy behind the scenes censoring any and all scientific evidence that challenges Darwin's theory from reaching the public. They are also censoring professors in universities from exposing any information to the public that threatens their little monkey fairy-tale.
The roles have been reversed. The atheist and evolutionist is today - what the Catholic Church was in the past. They hate scientific advance and would rather shut down public discussion before confronting evidence that proves that all life did not arise from one common ancestor.
That doesn't mean that the earth has to be 6000 year old. But isn't it amazing how humans were suppose to have evolved from Apes 3 million years ago, but there are organisms that are in rock strata dated over 300 million years old that are still ALIVE TODAY and they are unchanged? What's so special about us that it's necessary for evolutionists invent pseudo-science stories only fit for the Sci-Fi Channel?
Darwinism Destroyed by Geological Evidence & Anomalies
http://cross.tv/64437
Can you provide any evidence of the preposterous claims you make about scientists withholding evidence against Darwin's Theory of Evolution?

Since: Apr 14

San German, Puerto Rico

#113200 May 26, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Boy, you are still not getting it. Despite that, science is still limited.
Why? Because humans are limited.
I would be the first to admit that science is limited. It is limited by the limits of our powers of observation and the limits of our brains. And yet, science advances, while religions stay primitive and backward. I'll choose science over religion anytime!

“Be strong ...”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#113201 May 27, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> That is why you are a narrow minded idiot.
Wrong but hey, you are the great god charlie idiot so it is expected.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 37 min Into The Night 93,313
The Design of Time is Prophecy and is absolute ... 2 hr Aunty Christ 6
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr Samuel Patre 167,853
What's your religion? (Sep '17) 5 hr 15th Dalai Lama 1,134
How can people believe the Buy-bull? 9 hr Rose_NoHo 1
Did we evolved from Canadians? 9 hr Mystical science 1
Tennepithecus Americanus 11 hr Mystical science 1