real life wrote:
A pool of non-living chemicals has no mechanism to regulate and harness energy to produce extraordinarily complex molecules that carry information and the ability to replicate themselves.
An interesting argument after you have been telling us that Shapiro is correct. Do you now think Shapiro was incorrect?
Can energy create molecules that replicate themselves? Yes or no? If no then why do you quote Shapiro as a source to support your argument?
Quote:
Just adding energy alone will not overcome entropy and allow living things to generate themselves from dead chemicals.
Sorry. It won't happen.
I see you failed to address more complex atoms being made in an explosion. Tell us again how explosions can only make things that are LESS complex and explain how helium is not as complex as hydrogen.
You also failed to address how life can exist without energy.
You spout stuff you read on creationist websites with no understanding of their argument let alone the science they are trying to dispute.
So let's recap.
You can't explain how the 2nd law of thermodynamics works.
You can't explain the math in the 2nd law.
You claim anyone that uses the mathematical equation of the 2nd law is not using it correctly. (Energy transfer is one of the 2 variable used to show the entropy and you demand we not include energy transfer in talking about evolution and the 2nd law.)
You claim evolution violates the 2nd law but when shown a math proof that shows you are wrong you can't point to any errors in that math.
You claim nothing more complex can come from energy transfer yet you cite an author that claims the opposite to support your position.
You claim an explosion can never create anything more complex but when shown that a hydrogen fusion reaction creates helium you can't explain why helium is less complex than hydrogen.
You make a lot of claims that don't show any common sense at all let alone any understanding of basic science.
