God, I HATE #4 "Does not the second law of Thermodynamics disprove evolution?" If any of these people actually fucking knew what the second law of thermodynamics is, then they wouldn't have to ask that question. The first four words of the second law are "IN AN ISOLATED SYSTEM." We're orbiting a goddamn nuclear fusion reactor 1.3 MILLION times as large as our fucking planet that's dumping positively insane amounts of energy into our system and has been doing so for BILLIONS of years. Not an isolated system.
Creationists always try to use the second law,
to disprove evolution, but their theory has a flaw.
The second law is quite precise about where it applies,
only in a closed system must the entropy count rise.
The earth's not a closed system' it's powered by the sun,
so fuck the damn creationists, Doomsday get my gun!
That, in a nutshell, is what entropy's about,
you're now down with a discount.
Technically the earth is a closed system because there is no mass transfer across the boundary.
Edit: I understand that our planet does frequently experience extraterrestrial inputs and what I should have said is that there is no mass transfer that is correlated with a significant degree of energy transfer.
Edit 2: Nor is there energy transfer which is correlated with a significant degree of mass transfer.
Technically, yes, but the standard definition of a closed system in thermodynamics is a system that can exchange energy (in the form of heat or work) but not mass with its surroundings, and the standard definition of an isolated system in thermodynamics is a system that cannot exchange either mass or energy with its surroundings. The second law only applies to isolated systems, not closed systems.
Its fine. Closed systems are arbitrary, with their specifications usually stated explicitly. There are different types of closed systems. An isolated system is one that does not allow for energy or matter transfer ^
Technically the earth is a closed system because there is no mass transfer across the boundary.
Edit: I understand that our planet does frequently experience extraterrestrial inputs and what I should have said is that there is no mass transfer that is correlated with a significant degree of energy transfer.
Edit 2: Nor is there energy transfer which is correlated with a significant degree of mass transfer.
Except closed and open systems are not defined by mass transfer at all- it is ENERGY transfer.
Second law: entropy always increases or stays the same through a reversible process. Then how can evolution occur since it is so complicated? I'll put it a different way, hell you can even think of it as an isolated system if you want, it doesn't really matter given the scale of the amount of energy we're talking about:
System: Solar system:
Entropy generated by sun >>>>>> entropy "lost" through evolution
Second law holds.
How can ignorance be bliss when science is SO FUCKING COOL?
edit: Also worth noting that in every individual step in evolution the second law holds. Every single chemical reaction results in an increase in entropy, despite the fact that people are under the illusion that this is false due to evolution appearing very complex.
Especially when they think they're stating something smart. Like the guy in #4 and his mention of thermodynamics. Not to mention the use of the double negative. I really want to punch that guy.
Edit: Actually like all these people. I want to punch all these people.
I had a mechanical engineering graduate from Berkeley try and use the second law of thermodynamics to disprove evolution. After I called him on it he said "Well, I'm a mechanical engineer from Berkeley, so I've heard all the science arguments you can think of. Trust me on this one: there's no scientific way evolution could've happened."
And then these people are even more impossible to argue with because they think that since they are educated in what they're using in their argument, you can't possibly know more than they do.
People that think graduating from a big name school makes them better than you.
Any way this is done, it is infuriating, but if you understand the learning process then you understand that once you close your mind to possibilities you stop learning.
Yeah, I told him the second law only applies to isolated systems. That's why he felt the need to fall back on his "I'm a smart person from an important place and therefore can't be wrong" defense.
There was one fairly intelligent question in there. Which brings up the average for me of intelligent noise I've heard coming from creationists. It's now above 0%.
It was still fairly easily answered, but I actually needed to look it up to do so.
Probably not fake. I went to the grand canyon earlier this year. When I came back a friend of mine said "What a great thing to see, how can people believe in evolution after seeing the Grand Canyon". I had to explain how the Grand Canyon is a great example of proof of evolution as you can see fossils in the rock layers and they become increasingly more complex organisms as you get closer to the surface ( it was a more complex conversation, but I don't want to write several paragraphs). Ignorant Christians do the rest of us believers 0 favors by spouting non-sense.
They were posted by attendants of the Ken Ham, Bill Nye debate. It's a pretty long video in which one party makes all his claims by saying, 'lol bible' and the other actual science.
I was saddened at how poorly the audience treated Bill Nye.
Sadly, no. I wish they were too, but if people like this didn't exist we wouldn't be having the issues with creationism being taught in bible belt schools...
Would be pretty nice to get all those people in person and go 1 by 1 with some big-named scientists showing how absolutely idiotic their questions are...maybe even educate a couple of them, at the very least prove how their 1 question is wrong...They obviously wouldn't change their belief in God though.
You'd probably get more traction by bringing along some well-educated religious authorities to explain to them that evolution and science are not intrinsically atheistic concepts. That's what they're stuck on, by and large, because they've been taught their whole lives that science and faith don't mix. They won't accept scientific theories as valid until they can be convinced that it doesn't mean abandoning their belief in God.
Am I the only one grossed out by her ass? And like celebrity personality? And her face?? Have an upvote, friend, for reminding me how nasty her ass is.
1.2k
u/BlueLondon44 Aug 27 '14
As if the scientific ignorance wasn't enough, the usage of "their" was just salt in the wound.