Evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics

Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the “big bang”

The Big Bang Theory does NOT claim that everything came from NOTHING. Creationism, does though. 

 
 That thread seemed like something very different.
 Did you like it?
 No.
 Then it wasn't different.
 ohhohohoho!

 That thread seemed like something very different.
 Did you like it?
 No.
 Then it wasn't different.
 ohhohohoho!

Your job is to now to solely these posts.

What does this have to do with Batman?

There's at least one fundie on every forum that uses the Big bang/evolution and 2nd law argument.

Yep - and it's usually the same guy.  Cassiterides. 

What does this have to do with Batman?

Exactly. Despite your low post count you can at least stay on topic. This noob is going places.

What does this have to do with Batman?

You'll fit right in, good man.

Why isn't Cass banned yet? All he does it makes alts to make threads, and then he replies to them.

He has like 4 sockpuppet accounts here.

Also, this is ridiculous:

 

It then violates the second law of thermodynamics by creating an ordered universe from an explosion. Explosions do not produce order, but chaos. The proposed Big Bang would have been a destructive event of unimaginable proportions, which could not have produced an ordered universe.

In case nobody knows, an expenditure of energy is always required to create order. Also, these fundies do not even understand how entropy works. They think, "It is either order, or chaos." when it really isn't. Entropy depends solely on the net change of the Universe.

Black holes seemingly order the universe since they pull matter into clumps, and even large galaxies, but at the same time, the blackhole creates such an increase of gravitational disorder, that there is still a net gain in the equation.

tl;dr A seemingly ordered universe is an entropic one.

Also, not a closed system.

Quote from: matthiashues on January 04, 2011, 12:12:16 PM

1. Not a "copy and pasta" from the internet. If it is paste me the link i copied it from?.

2. Who is Cass?

3. What does God have anything to with with this thread? Why bring it up?

4. Big Bang has many flaws, science has moved on past that theory.

5. Give the exact quote where i said the earth is a "closed system". I never said the earth was a closed system.

The earth is neither open or closed it is beyond either.

If you want to find another example of this argument, google 'evolution vs creationism'. There's at least one fundie on every forum that uses the Big bang/evolution and 2nd law argument. It's a tried and true troll argument, but it also sucks for plainly obvious reasons.

Given the amount of obvious problems with the argument, it isn't long before God is mentioned and the thread spirals into crap.

Given that this forum is filled with tried and true troll arguments, I wouldn't give him to much hell

''Evolution only talks about the change in an organism.
Ambiogenesis is the creation of life from molecules''
====

Abiogenesis = the theory of organic evolution.

Like macroevolution this has never been observed though, so its not apart of science. Just another faith/speculation/assumption.

as pongo has pointed out to me,
google four winged fruit flies.
also new species of bacteria.
Also dogs, as they seem to be on their way to new subspecies at the very least

And if human's didn't evolve, why are there no millions year old human fossils or evidence of uber old civilization?
how come we can't make new planets? after all, we'd have been a race for billions of years

Quote from: Cassiterides on January 04, 2011, 07:25:48 PM

''Evolution only talks about the change in an organism.
Ambiogenesis is the creation of life from molecules''
====

Abiogenesis = the theory of organic evolution.

Like macroevolution this has never been observed though, so its not apart of science. Just another faith/speculation/assumption.

as pongo has pointed out to me,
google four winged fruit flies.
also new species of bacteria.
Also dogs, as they seem to be on their way to new subspecies at the very least

And if human's didn't evolve, why are there no millions year old human fossils or evidence of uber old civilization?
how come we can't make new planets? after all, we'd have been a race for billions of years

The earth is not billions of years old. it is 6000 years old give or take a couple hundereds years as infered by the bible. duh.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on January 14, 2011, 01:15:17 AM

Quote from: Cassiterides on January 04, 2011, 07:25:48 PM

''Evolution only talks about the change in an organism.
Ambiogenesis is the creation of life from molecules''
====

Abiogenesis = the theory of organic evolution.

Like macroevolution this has never been observed though, so its not apart of science. Just another faith/speculation/assumption.

as pongo has pointed out to me,
google four winged fruit flies.
also new species of bacteria.
Also dogs, as they seem to be on their way to new subspecies at the very least

And if human's didn't evolve, why are there no millions year old human fossils or evidence of uber old civilization?
how come we can't make new planets? after all, we'd have been a race for billions of years

The earth is not billions of years old. it is 6000 years old give or take a couple hundereds years as infered by the bible. duh.

imma interpret that as sarcasm
but:

6 different types of evolution

Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the “big bang”
Chemical evolution: all elements “evolved” from hydrogen
Stellar evolution: stars and planets formed from gas clouds
Organic evolution: life begins from inanimate matter
Macro-evolution: animals and plants change from one type into another
Micro-evolution: minor variations/adapations

First 5 have never been observed, tested or repeated.

Only number 6 *microevolution is science.

You can still believe in the first 5 as your religion/faith though, but they are not science.

1st one: why do you think we are doing the LHC?
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-12/making-something-nothing-theory-says-matter-can-be-conjured-vacuum
Big bang is not nothing (as mentioned many times) but from a singularity
Chemical evolution: nuclear fusion up to iron, supernovas past that.  We also have made elements before (didn’t we make plutonium and beyond?)
Stellar evolution: observed star formations with hubble
http://rsd.gsfc.nasa.gov/rsd/images/EGGs.html
http://www.astro.ex.ac.uk/people/mbate/Research/97-09.html
organic evolution: we got close, got a virus
http://cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0311/90.htm
coat that with some fat and other stuff and you can get a cell theoretically  also we can make bacteria with custom dna
macro-evolution: we have observed species change
look at this page, may answer questions
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
also, in the theory of evolution, there is no difference between macro and micro, as there is no observed effect that divides them, like saying if I wait for a minute or wait of an hour, I am still waiting, and eventually, by waiting minutes, I  will wait an hour