There are no real exceptions to the second law of thermodynamics, are there?

Complexity, Information, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics  

The Evolutionists will tell you a half truth about the Second Law of Thermodynamics.   The Evolutionists will tell the half truth: "The Second Law of Thermodynamics only applies to isolated systems, so it's not relevant to evolution, because the Earth is an open system."   This is a clever lie.   Here is the part of the truth that they are withholding:   the Second Law of Thermodynamics was derived using theoretical isolated systems, but it applies to all systems, and can only be overcome locally, microscopically, insignificantly, and temporarily in open systems when stringent conditions are met. Not only that, but we are not talking about the Earth.   The Earth is just a subsystem of a much larger system called the Universe.   The Universe is an isolated system.   Evolutionists claim that Evolution took place in this isolated system, but the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that their story is a myth.   http://www.icr.org/article/entropy-open-systems/   and http://www.icr.org/article/barrier-evolution/

There is no possible observation that could possibly disprove evolution to an evolutionist; they even ignore, explain away, or re-define the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

The Second Law Of Thermodynamics Can Be Used To Illustrate The Fact That The Forming Of The First Cell By Natural Processes Is So Remote That No Sane, Informed Person Could Believe That It Would Happen.

More information on the Second Law of Thermodynamics can be found here & here & here & here & here

Evolutionists are constantly searching for some sane argument for a method by which complexity and order could have possibly developed by naturalistic means--as if telling an uncheckable lie makes the lie true.   But they can't even come up with an uncheckable lie.   So far they have come up with wild tales like the following:   "Whence life complexity?   Give evolutionists all the carbon-based molecules they want: will they get life to form and evolve?   Will the amino acids form proteins (see online book) that can evolve into complex life?   Michael Lynch and Ariel Fernandez, scientists at the University of Chicago, reported PhysOrg began with proteins, and then speculated that "Errors in protein structure sparked evolution of biological complexity."   That's right: complex life is the result of mistakes.   This idea was published in Nature.¹ "... "This new idea is actually un-Darwinian.   In a nutshell, PhysOrg said, "random introduction of errors into proteins, rather than traditional natural selection, may have boosted the evolution of biological complexity."   How can that be?   Is there any complex system that gets better with the introduction of random errors?"... "Help your local pre-creationist friend at the university become a full-fledged one.   Give him or her the following books:

 
• Nonsense of a High Order: The Confused and Illusory World of the Atheist by Moshe Averick.   Chapter 3 gives a good summary of the hopelessness of evolutionary theories on the origin of life, with ample quotes from leading evolutionists and origin-of-life researchers themselves.
 
• Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer.
 
• Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome by Dr. John C. Sanford.   Fascinating and convincing evidence (from a geneticist) on why mutations will never, ever lead to increased fitness-in fact, the human genome is disintegrating due to mutations.
 
• The Nature of Nature by numerous authors on both sides of the design question.
 
• The Programming of Life by Don Johnson." (Source: CREV - read more)

The Second Law of Thermodynamics  is a matter of probabilities.   It neither causes anything  or prevents anything.

Sometimes, anti-Creation Evolutionist will say that  Creation Scientists are claiming that the Second Law of Thermodynamics prevents  evolution from happening.   That isn't  what they are saying.   Well, in a sense it is,  but the  anti-Creation folks try to twist it into an unscientific statement.    

The Second Law of Thermodynamics  can be used to illustrate the fact that  the  forming of the first cell by natural processes is so remote that no sane, informed  person could believe that it would happen.

Transitions from one kind of living thing to another by natural processes is so remote that no sane, informed  person could believe that it would happen.   The Second Law of Thermodynamics  can be used to illustrate this fact.

Spontaneous Ordering Or Separating Has Nothing To Do With Making Things More Complex Or Adding Information.

Spontaneous ordering or separating has nothing to do with making things complex or adding information to them.   There are many natural  examples of spontaneous ordering.   Adding raw energy to water can make steam separate, but that adds no complexity or information to the water.   Evolutionists say that adding raw energy can cause ordering.   So what?   Spontaneous ordering has nothing to do with complexifying or adding information.    For life, we need both extremely organized  complexity and vast amounts of organized information.

The ability to create dissymmetry is not related to evolution in any way.   Dissymmetry does not cause complexifying, nor does it add information.

How many times do you have to drop a hydrogen bomb on a planet before you get a space shuttle?   Would it be sane to believe that it could ever happen?   No.   It would not.

So-Called Natural Selection Cannot Create Goo-To-You Evolution.  

"Evolutionists cite the variations among the sub-species of Gal¡pagos tortoise as an example of evolution. But this is the typical equivocation or the bait-and-switch game of propagandists.⁹ Evolution from goo to you via the zoo would require new genes encoding encyclopedic amounts of new information. But the tortoises' adaptation to various island environments can be explained by the sorting out of already existing genes, with some of these then eliminated by natural selection."   http://creation.com/galapagos-tortoises  

This is just one of many examples of the "natural selection" lies told to sell Evolutionism.  

Salt Crystals Are Not Strands Of DNA. A Strand Of DNA Is Not A Cell.

Evolutionists will often use faulty logic to compare salt crystals and DNA.

Salt Crystals are not strands of DNA.   A Strand of DNA is not a cell.

The smallest components  of a salt crystal are Na⁺ and Cl^- ions.   Nothing has to be brought in from the outside for these to form into salt.   A functional DNA molecule does not come into existence naturally.   The comparison is not valid.   This is not the addition of complexity or information beyond what could be predicted by the Second Law of Thermodynamics, while  the creation of functional DNA molecules in quantities that would be needed to create life would be improbable.   For anyone with understanding, it would be insane to believe in the spontaneous generation of DNA molecules in this way.   In addition, it is a terribly long road from the creation of a giant mass of DNA molecules (which would be statistically impossible in the first place) to the combination of these molecules into anything that could support life.

There Are No Examples Of Continued Overall Increases In Complexity And Information Without Intelligence.

There are no examples of continued overall increases in complexity and information without intelligence.   There are many examples of natural processes causing separation or temporary  fluctuations in complexity with a net effect of losing complexity and information over time.   For this reason, complexity and information are indicators of intelligence.

If we observe complexity and information, we know that we are observing the results of some intelligence.   If I see a new vehicle in my back yard, I would not assume that it was formed my random processes.   Of course, a new vehicle is much less complex and contains much less intelligence than the most simple of all cells, but I still would not assume that the vehicle was formed my natural processes.

Evolution Is Impossible, But The Impossible Must Happen Over Huge Amounts Of Time... Really?

As an aside, it is obvious that science does not, in itself, have the capacity to prove either a young or an old Earth.   Both positions use the same scientific facts to come to very different conclusions based on either presupposition or direct revelation.   Some would say it this way: the differences are in the beliefs, and those beliefs are based either in presuppositions or in revelation.

A common evolutionistic ploy is to say, "Evolution is impossible, but the impossible must happen over huge amounts of time, therefore evolution proves that the earth is billions of years old."   Not all Evolutionists make this claim, but many do.    Evolution isn't science.   It's faulty reasoning.   But the wild idea of an old earth doesn't help the evolutionists anyway.   Time actually hurts their story. Time is not on their side. The second law of thermodynamics and the eventual heat death that natural processes would lead to over vast amounts of time blows that idea right out of the water.

There is plenty of scientific evidence for a young Earth and a recent creation:

 
• Semi-technical Article
 
• Several Articles on Various Aspects
 
• What Evidence is Used to Show that the Earth is Young?
 
• The Universe was Created Recently.
 
• Fourteen Easy-To-Understand Reasons for a Young Earth
 
• Questions and Answers About the Age of the Earth
 
• Old Galaxies Don't Line Up with Facts
 
• About the human brain (video: about 90 seconds)  
  

Time and chance result in less information and less organization. That is the proven 2^nd law of thermodynamics. You can see it in everything from your car to your house to your body. Adding energy from an external source, as the Japanese did to Pearl Harbor and the U.S. did to Hiroshima a few decades ago--and as the Sun does to the roof of your house every day--adding energy just makes things worse. Only if there is a way to control, direct, and use that energy according to a plan will there be any benefit from outside energy. In other words, the evolutionist's claim of millions or billions of years actually hurts their case from a scientific standpoint. When  evolutionists claim that adding energy reverses the  Second Law of Thermodynamics, they are either showing ignorance or showing a willingness to lie.

One evolutionist claimed, "Although the overall amount of disorder in a closed system cannot decrease, local order within a larger system can increase even without the actions of an intelligent agent." This is na¯ve. The earth is open to the Sun, but that's not enough. There has to be a mechanism to convert that energy into complexity. The introduction of energy into an open system will increase entropy, not decrease it. In other words, if you lay out in the Sun, your skin will get old faster. If you park your car in the Sun, the paint job will go bad faster. A mechanism, such as the mechanism found in plants, has to be in place to use solar energy or else the energy just makes things self-destruct faster.

"Once I had a formal debate with two biologists on the faculty at a state university. I used the entropy law as one of my main arguments, but neither of the evolutionists even mentioned this argument in their rebuttals. In the question period that followed, the professor who was teaching the course in engineering thermodynamics at that university asked them how they would answer the argument, which seemed valid to him. After consulting with each other, they said they did not know how to answer it, since they had both done poorly in physics. But they still insisted evolution was science. "   Dr. Henry Morris   http://icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=2477  

"Remember this tendency from order to disorder applies to all real processes. Real processes include, of course, biological and geological processes, as well as chemical and physical processes. The interesting question is: "How does a real biological process, which goes from order to disorder, result in evolution, which goes from disorder to order?" Perhaps the evolutionist can ultimately find an answer to this question, but he at least should not ignore it, as most evolutionists do.   Especially is such a question vital, when we are thinking of evolution as a growth process on the grand scale from atom to Adam and from particle to people. This represents an absolutely gigantic increase in order and complexity, and is clearly out of place altogether in the context of the Second Law."   http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-thermodynamics-entropy/

Here are some resources for conversations with unbelievers:

 
• AIG Nuclear Strength Apologetics
 
• Who Is Jesus: Defending Jesus Christ as the Way (part 1 of 2)
 
• Who Is Jesus: Defending Jesus Christ as the Way (part 2 of 2)
 
• Faith Under Fire: Jesus Among Other Gods (part 1 of 2)
 
• Faith Under Fire: Jesus Among Other Gods (part 2 of 2)
 
• God or Science: Stephen Hawking's False Choice (part 1 of 2)
 
• God or Science: Stephen Hawking's False Choice (part 2 of 2)
 
• The Loss of Truth (part 1 of 2)
 
• The Loss of Truth (part 2 of 2)
 
• Is Atheism Dead? Is God Alive? (part 1 of 2)
 
• Is Atheism Dead? Is God Alive? (part 2 of 2)
 
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 1 of 4)
 
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 2 of 4)
 
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 3 of 4)
 
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 4 of 4)
 
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 1 of 4)
 
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 2 of 4)
 
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 3 of 4)
 
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 4 of 4)
 
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 1 of 4)
 
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 2 of 4)
 
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 3 of 4)
 
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 4 of 4)

Evolutionism

more info: mouseover or click

There is so much more for you. This is what you have been missing. Don't let anyone deceptively keep you from fulfilling your destiny and God's purpose for your life.

God has established the pattern of Scripture, for life and for the Church.

You can feel free to use the Contact Form further down on this page to ask any question regarding this pattern of Scripture. The Church, the Body of Christ, and discernment of this Body, is the method that God is using to finish the work in His Body. The Body of Christ, God's Temple, is built up by that which every joint supplies, building each other up in love, and the Temple must be built according to the pattern of Scripture.

We believe the Holy Scriptures teach:

• The 5 apostolic ministries (Ephesians 4:11)
• The nine gifts of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:8-10)
• Local congregations overseen by elders and deacons (Titus 1:5)
• Every member having and being a ministry in the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:11)
• Being led by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:14)
• The gathering together of the Body of Christ (Genesis 49:10, John 17:21)