Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists dressing up themodynamic laws with a null hypotheses.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Biologist" data-source="post: 53046623" data-attributes="member: 155467"><p><a href="http://www.trueorigin.org/steiger.asp" target="_blank">- Thermodynamics vs. Evolutionism -</a></p><p></p><p>The article is long. Much longer than is should be, the question is: </p><p>"Does Evolution violate the laws of Thermodynamics?" </p><p></p><p>The answer is: Since earth is an open system the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not applicable in proving or disproving the Theory of Evolution. </p><p></p><p>This isn't debatable, the law ceases to be a law in an open system. </p><p></p><p>Where the article went wrong(Obvious lies):</p><p></p><p>Here's the moment in time where the author went wrong. He changes from the Second Law to a null hypothesis and rambles on for paragraphs about said null hypothesis. </p><p></p><p>This statement is saying is that the entropy of a closed system or an open system cannot decrease. Which turns a very consistant observation(Second Law) into an entirely null hypothesis. </p><p></p><p>No it doesn't. It only fails in the face of a bait and switch argument where the writer went from the Second Law to a null hypothesis. </p><p></p><p>The quotes were about the Second Law not the null hypothesis.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Biologist, post: 53046623, member: 155467"] [url=http://www.trueorigin.org/steiger.asp]- Thermodynamics vs. Evolutionism -[/url] The article is long. Much longer than is should be, the question is: "Does Evolution violate the laws of Thermodynamics?" The answer is: Since earth is an open system the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not applicable in proving or disproving the Theory of Evolution. This isn't debatable, the law ceases to be a law in an open system. Where the article went wrong(Obvious lies): Here's the moment in time where the author went wrong. He changes from the Second Law to a null hypothesis and rambles on for paragraphs about said null hypothesis. This statement is saying is that the entropy of a closed system or an open system cannot decrease. Which turns a very consistant observation(Second Law) into an entirely null hypothesis. No it doesn't. It only fails in the face of a bait and switch argument where the writer went from the Second Law to a null hypothesis. The quotes were about the Second Law not the null hypothesis. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists dressing up themodynamic laws with a null hypotheses.
Top
Bottom