The Second Law of Thermodynamics contradicts the Theory of Evolution

At EvC they are complaining about creationist arguments concerning the Second Law of Thermodynamics, in a thread titled Infuriating Arguments. This gets into solar energy beyond my abilities.

It seems to me, however, that I've seen creationist arguments about the "closed system" that aren't quite what is being presented here but since I haven't followed them I can't really say anything about them.

But discrediting a particular argument about the Second Law doesn't necessarily discredit the whole creationist claim.

It seems to me to be pretty obvious that the universe IS gradually running down or losing energy or however that should be put. You can always point to factors that demonstrate renewal and growth nevertheless because seeds do sprout and grow to maturity, babies do start from a seed and grow up, the sun does give energy to all life on earth and so on and so forth, and yet, overall, the sun is gradually gradually burning out, living things are subject to disease and death, even extinction of whole species, and that's where we can see the Second Law in operation. Things running down, things running out. Slowly, very slowly. The evidence of the Fall.

The argument of course is that the Theory of Evolution contradicts the Second Law: both can't be true. They solve the problem by tacitly assuming or hallucinating an ever-renewing input of life energy that does not exist.

Oh, and if with much abstruse mathematical conjuring you can "prove" that the Second Law does not describe what I'm describing, then we need another law, that's all, because what I'm talking about IS happening and creationists know it is happening, and anybody with half a brain ought to know it's happening and it doesn't matter one iota whether the Second Law says so to your satisfaction or not.

==========
Later (Message 17) Trixie says:

Last night someone who was arguing for a 6000 year old earth and a global flood supported their position by linking to information on ice ages dated to 11,000 and 14,700 years ago. Another genius tried to cast doubt on carbon-dating by pointing out problems specific to K/Ar dating then linking to a page which exposed the errors in the usual arguments against carbon-dating, so refuting himself.

I don't know what the argument concerning the ice age(s) was but apparently the creationist failed to make clear that he/she denies the dates assigned by old-earth science, which obviously Trixie accepts as gospel truth. We know there was ONE ice age, but there most likely weren't two, and the one can't be older than the Flood. According to something I read somewhere the ice age was most likely the result of heat released in the Flood period, on the same principle as refrigeration (don't ask, haven't researched this in some time), heat caused probably by tectonic movement.

As for the rest of it, it sounds like the creationist did get confused.

==========
And in message 46 by Son Goku:

Unfortunately the Second Law of Thermodynamics is a particularly difficult concept to set right to an audience of this kind. This is because a lot of presentations make it appear to be about order and disorder (where as this is only a common, but not universal, consequence of it). Unfortunately an "increase in disorder" fits with all sorts of notions such as the decline of the world after the "fall". I've seen many Creationists using it as scientific proof of their world view, i.e. "Look the world really is decaying!"

I don't think we need the Second Law to know the world "really is decaying," that takes just the minimal knowledge of the fact that the sun IS gradually burning out and life DOES die, and the Second Law seems to reflect this fact. If it doesn't it doesn't, nevertheless the world "really is decaying."

Evolution, racism, conscience-free murder, dehumanization, atheism, all of a piece

This is from Chris Pinto at his Adullam Films site:

Hitler’s concept of the Aryan (exalted or noble) race represented the highest point of the evolutionary pyramid, and all races that fell beneath the Aryan standard were fair game for removal (i.e., extermination). This is why Hitler equated Jews with rats and termites. In fact, the Zyklon-B gas used to murder Jews in the showers of Auschwitz was originally a pesticide developed to kill insects. This is also why the Nazis used Jewish skin, bones and teeth to make lamp shades and brush handles – because killing a Jew was deemed no different than killing a cow, cutting down a tree, or picking cotton from a field – according to Darwinian philosophy. Darwin’s “struggle” for life seems to have been the theme of Hitler’s famous work – Mein Kampf (i.e. My Struggle). His struggle was the preservation of the Aryan race, the favored race according to Hitler.

Some people coming out of Communist countries tell of how the Communists used evolution in schools to remove the consciousness of God from the minds of the people. Evolution removes the authority of God, and makes man his own god – accountable to no one but himself. In Communist countries, Marxist Atheism is the rule and the state is the supreme authority. Yet according to The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (first published in 1997), some 94 million people were mass murdered in the 20th century by this atheist form of government. That’s more than all the people killed through the Crusades and the Inquisitions combined. Keep that in mind the next time your atheist friend tells you about the “evils” of religion in government. Also remember that evolution is the cornerstone of both atheism and the occult.

They can deny it all they want, the evolutionists, such as those at EvC forums, and of course they will deny it and muster all kinds of ridiculous notions of "evidence" against it, but it's well known that evolutionism goes hand in hand with dehumanization and atheism.

More evidence for the Flood

This is a unique geological phenomenon known as Danxia landform. These phenomena can be observed in several places in China. This example is located in Zhangye, Province of Gansu.

The color is the result of an accumulation for millions of years of red sandstone and other rocks. layered deposition of wet separated sediments by the Flood of Noah, distorted by tectonic forces set in motion during the same event, now hardened into red sandstone and other rocks.

The messiness (aka bloodiness, harmfulness, ugliness) challenge to creationism answered again

Just a quick comment on that same thread about novel features I posted on below. Tangle has been bringing it back from time to time, Zaius and WK get off into technical neverland occasionally but even they are doing a better job than I would have expected of keeping the main question in mind, which is whether mutations are the source of new alleles / traits, or they are built in from the beginning. So far they are unable to make a definite call. Of course I'm convinced that any actually useful alleles were there from the beginning and that mutations are ONLY destructive accidents that evolutionists have pounced on as their one vain hope for a mechanism of change that could support the theory.

Be that as it may, what I really wanted to comment on was Tangle's off-the-cuff comment in the post linked above:

ABE - as an irrelevant aside, the sheer messiness and complexity of these systems are evidence against design.

Well, it's true that God's original design doesn't account for it, but since what you really mean is that it's evidence against creationism as such, that's not so, Tangle. This is another favorite evolutionist challenge to creationism that has been answered over and over but keeps being thrown out there again anyway.

It can only be answered by a BIBLICAL creationist, however, who accepts Genesis in its entirety and doesn't try to read extra time between the lines or explain away the traditional understanding of the text:

The messiness of genetics is explained not by the Creation -- that is, God's original design -- but by the Fall, which introduced the processes of death and disease into the Creation. Complexity is one thing, expectable in God's Creation -- that rightly should lead to awe and appreciation -- but the kind of complexity that is really unpredictable chaos and confusion that is difficult to interpret must be attributed to the Fall. Mutations must be attributed to the Fall -- until someone can show that their occurrence obeys a law, which so far hasn't happened and doesn't seem at all likely ever to happen. Mutations are accidents, mistakes in the replication of the genetic material, KNOWN to be the cause of thousands of disease processes and NOT known even once to have produced a viable healthy allele.

Design is not challenged by the messiness, the messiness was introduced by disobedience of God, and evidence for this is everywhere in damage to the original creation -- which still shines through in many ways nevertheless.