: With a few clicks of the mouse I did some investigation on the second law with respect to the Creationist side of the argument. I felt compelled to do this as a result of one of Val's quotes which stated that we (I?) used it to argue against evolution. Purposely, I went to a site that was "pro-materialist". The writer gave an eloquent description of the second law, in addition to some equations describing entropy and how order can arise from disorder, giving examples such as snowflakes, crystals etc. I could be missing something, but I fail to see how this could possibly be construed to add credence the evolutionary paradigm. Am I to think that because snowflakes will form from water-vapor, that a single celled organism can occur due to random encounters of simple organic molecules? From what I have read the state of the art postulate put forth by the materialists is that RNA was formed prior to DNA. No small miracle in of itself, but, lets take it for a ride. We know that DNA molecules contain vast amounts of information. Granted, RNA has a similar capacity for information storage. So what? Lets go a little farther and assume that the RNA that formed through a random process just happen to contain some information. Perhaps an analogy, at this juncture, would help me prove my point. If you had a compact disc with your favorite music on it, but had no CD player, could you listen to it? If you had a sea of compact discs and no CD player could listen to your music? Of course not. The "proto- RNA" would have to encode for the "proto-ribosome", but the "proto-ribosome" has to wait for the proto-ribosome that has'nt been built yet to read the information off the proto-RNA so the proto-ribosome could be built. Ludicrous.. A faith that can't stand a collision with the Truth is worth no regrets...

:::::::::::::: No offense my friend, but this is the common creationist "argument from ignorance" (a semantical debating term, not an insult) on the 2nd law issue.

The 2nd law applies to closed systems where no energy is induced from outside the closed system itself. The universe as a whole is considered to be a closed system and hence entropy is its fate as far as we know at this time.

The Earth itself however IS NOT a closed system. Energy is being induced into it constantly from the Sun. There is a net gain contributing to the Earth as a whole, not a loss. Part of the transormation of energy into matter is life itself and therefore the logical branching of evolutionary processes.

I would also point out how our new contributor here "Valkyrie" has included in one of her quotes, the silly argument of how creationist like to say the the vast diversity in life forms we see today all "MICRO evolved form the stock on the "Ark", while also putting forth the 2nd law misconception you refer to here. The two are thus a contridiction of each of their own postulations. It's easily missed in most debates and therefore easily pointed out for the contradiction it is.

The only faith/truth collision in any of this is the collision of Young Earth Creation and reality itself.

I'll be back with the DNA RNA ribosome issue. I have to go look it up, but it is proven by experimentation that a logical explanation can be found.

Have a good day for now, daViper

• Design........in everthing - Russ/">Russ - July 25, 1999 - 04:55 UTC
  • Re: Design........in everthing - bzrd - July 25, 1999 - 12:44 UTC
    • Re: Design........in everthing - daViper - July 26, 1999 - 22:37 UTC
  • Re: Design........in everthing - Cynthia - July 25, 1999 - 21:13 UTC
    • Re: Design........in everthing - bzrd - July 25, 1999 - 23:37 UTC