And so, I refute evolution...

[Cheese]

During a particularly odd evening at the townie bar back in Wisconsin, I heard an interesting thing. I will contextualize it more later when I have slept.

The argument went as such:
1. Do you believe in the first law of thermodynamics?
Yes, the universe is clearly tending towards disorder.

Therefore, evolution is false.

Discuss, please.

[Seanz0rz]

the first law of thermodynamics is not chaos theory, it is conservation of energy. im assuming you are talking about the second law.

so for the layman, second law of thermo is basically the chaos theory(chaos theory applies to nature and general things, such as my desk and garage, where as second law of thermo applies to, well, thermo) and this is a rather large generalization, but for the sake of this discussion, its fine.

first, it states that an action is generally irreversible. in thermo, heat can travel from hot to cold, but not from cold to hot.

now for evolution, i think this DOES NOT refute evolution, it doesnt prove it either, it is inconclusive. it states that a process must move foward, never backward. and evolution does this. many variations are present, the ones best suited to their enviroment survive and breed, those who are not, die out slowly.

thats the only connection i can see. this is obviously very generalized. i am an engineer, not a evolutionary theorist. this is, quite frankly, not my problem.

please do fill us in!

[jimbo74]

if things can go from cold to hot, then how does a fire work? fires superheats up an object to a point where it flashes and ignites, if there is enough fuel for consumtion, it will burn and continue burning

[Cheese]

Jim, I have no idea what you are talking about.

I recall the laws as one about conservation of energy, the other about tending to disorder, but this cannot be left on a technicality.

I was sitting at the pub with a friend from way back, having a few beers. At 11 p.m. one of the local youth pastors walked in. I was acquainted, had talked with him some and played softball with and against him for a number of summers.

Problem is, my friend told him I was studying Philosophy. What followed was epic.

He was trying to use part of science to refute another part of science in an attempt to support religion as a stand alone, absolute, all answering truth.

Problem is asserting that we are evolving TOWARDS something, that is to say, increasing order instead of decreasing, that would be counter towards common Thermodynical ideas. It is at best contentious and at worst wrong.

So a youth pastor walks into a bar, no joke.

[Seanz0rz]

we are in fact not evolving towards something, but rather in fact, evolving away from something, therefor, SUPPORTED (at least as far as the pastor is concerned) the theory of evolution.

evolution is not proactive, its reactive.

[91_4x4runner]

I have to agree with Sean. Everything that is considered evolution is an adaptation to an environment. It doesn't automatically happen.

[BruceTS]

Heck Cheese is a classic example of evolution in progress.....look at his 4Runner

[Cheese]

Thanks. I feel and often look more like a caveman. Evolving to buggy?

I have now tried to reply to this three times. Bummer.

A youth pastor walks into the bar... I had played softball with and against him and even attended his church. Unfortunately, my friend mentioned that I studied Philosophy and all hell broke out.

Evolution is a response to a dynamic environment.

I do not have any patience for selectively saying science proves other parts of science false in hopes of defending an absolute, all answering religious truth.

He asked if believing made it so. I told him I was agreeing with 98% of what he was saying, he would only here that last 2%.

I am not purely a science guy, although my education and experience in the field is different than most. I am comfortable with the idea there are just some things I cannot understand.

Can you know before you know?

[MTL_4runner]

3 Laymens Laws of Thermo:
1) You cannot win (that is, you cannot get something for nothing, because matter and energy are conserved).
2) You cannot break even (you cannot return to the same energy state, because there is always an increase in disorder; entropy always increases).
3) You cannot get out of the game (because absolute zero is unattainable).

Entropy or randomness is only relative to evolution in how you look at it. Chaos theory as it relates to the laws of thermodynamics just tells us that items with higher order (or potential) want to move towards lower order (or potential) or otherwise everything in the universe would attract and come together in a one giant superheated, superdense black hole. So is evolution really ordered or is it chaos? I'm sure you could try and argue both sides, but I'd bet money it doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics because it is in fact entropy or randomness which allows for the process of selection to occur. So really this only proves that people that use laws of thermodynamics to try and disprove evolution really have absoluetly no clue what they are talking about.

[Cheese]

That is kind of the feeling I had.

We also had a discussion about the existence of semis that was equally hilarious. I will write that up later.

Energy will be preserved, the universe tends to disorder and 0 K is not attainable, only theoretical. I am a Biologist by training, mostly large animals and ecology, not number science.