real life wrote:
I didn't claim that it applies to nothing.
I pointed out that that is the necessary (and false) conclusion that would be demanded if the incorrect interpretation used by many evolutionists is allowed to stand.
There is nothing necessary about that conclusion. It is your deluded idea that you can't measure something unless it is closed off from everything else. Measurements are done all the time in systems that are not closed. You only need to account for what enters and leaves.
So, you DID claim it applies to nothing by ignoring the reality of science since it certainly isn't a conclusion that was necessary. You CREATED the conclusion. No one else did. It was YOU.. It is YOUR strawman. YOUR lies. YOUR failure to understand even basic science. Your demand that we accept your false statements. There is nothing in that statement but YOU and YOU and YOU and YOU and YOU. You can't show anyone else making that conclusion. You can't show anyone else making that statement.
Quote:
If the Earth is allowed to be defined as an open system because it receives energy, then EVERYTHING is an open system. And therefore the 2nd Law would apply to nothing if it 'only applies to closed systems' .
Your strawman. The 2nd applies to EVERYTHING but to measure it you have to close the system by accounting for energy entering and leaving. You fail to address the math and you make up some crap how it can't apply. No such thing exists. It DOES apply. You just can't declare it doesn't apply because you don't understand one whit of science. In fact your lack of understanding makes all your statements fantastical when it comes to any mention you try to make about science.
Quote:
parados wrote:You act as if you understand science but your blindness is there for all to see.
Either show that the math is incorrect when the 2nd law is applied to the Earth or admit your claim is a lie. You can't state I am arguing the 2nd applies to nothing until you dispute and disprove where I have specifically applied it to the Earth.
Quote:Evolutionists say 'well, the 2nd Law doesn't apply because the Earth gets lots of energy from the sun, more than enough to overcome entropy'.
This statement is utter nonsense. It is a bold faced lie. It is an example of your ignorance and your attempts to shift the argument to your strawman. This IS a strawman RL. You have claimed something I have never said.
Where did I say that YOU had said it?
HERE>>>>
real life wrote:Evolutionists say 'well, the 2nd Law doesn't apply because the Earth gets lots of energy from the sun, more than enough to overcome entropy'.
You refer to others that accept evolution as "evolutionists". I accept evolution. Your statement says "evolutionists say" which would include me in your petty use of language. You just love to make statements and then pretend you didn't make them. Define "evolutionist" as you use it if you think it doesn't include me.
For that matter, where did you show evidence ANYONE said it? You haven't.
Scientists say you can't apply the 2nd law to the earth without taking into account the energy entering and leaving the earth. But you continually bastardize the meaning of that statement into something you feel you can argue against.
Quote:
parados wrote:Not only that you have claimed something that is almost completely opposite from what I said. You have then argued against YOUR construct instead of the math proof and declared yourself the winner because you defeated your own made up argument that you try to attribute to me.
Where did I attribute it to you?
I already pointed it out. Deny it all you want.
Quote:
parados wrote:The formula for entropy in the 2nd law has 3 elements in it. One of the 3 is energy transfer. You are trying to argue that the only way to apply the 2nd law is to remove energy transfer from the formula. When you do that, it is NO longer the 2nd law. It is entirely your construct and it is complete nonsense.
FACT - you continue to try to change the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Quote:When evolutionists do so, and thus define everything as an open system (based on input of energy),
FACT - the 2nd law REQUIRES that you include input of energy. Your argument is stupid.
I have no problem with the requirements of the 2nd Law. Only with the way it is misused by many evolutionists.
You have NOT shown one instance of them misusing it.
Quote:
If you go thru many of the discussions of the 2nd Law here on A2k and elsewhere, you will see the evolutionary side often use the arguments I have cited.
I don't see it anywhere. I see your attempts to claim they said something they didn't. Even when it is pointed out that you are completely misinterpreting what was said you persist in your childish fashion by claiming their statement creates a "necessary conclusion."
Quote:
If those arguments aren't representative of your own opinion, then I fail to see what you are so bent out of shape about.
That argument isn't representative of ANYONE's opinion other than your attempt to make it someone else's opinion.
