Science Knows Nothing about Evolution 2nd Law falsifies Evo

bart007 · Last edited by bart007 on Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:56 pm; edited 1 time in total

Example # 1: 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, presented and well recieved on a science blog in 2004.

Energy is an abstract idea. The basic scientific definition of 'Energy' is: "The ability to do work".

We humans developed this idea to enable us quantify the amount of work that material things and processes will allow us to perform, and to measure the efficiency of the work being done.

The impetus for developing this idea of 'Heat', which is one form of energy, came in the 19th century, due to the ever increasing use of steam engines. Steam was dependent on fossil fuels which had to be mined and transported. This use steam engines cost money. Thus it became increasingly important to corporate profits to replace inefficient steam engines with newer efficient, more productive, steam engines. This was simply a case of invention not driven by science, but science driven by invention (though later improvements on the steam engine were based on the new science called 'Thermodynamics'). As one commentator noted, "Science owes more to the steam engine than the steam engine owes to Science.” [Chemical Biologist L. J. Henderson (1917)]

Heat is defined as the form of energy that is transferred across a system boundary to another system or surroundings that is/are at a lower temperature/s.

Accordingly, by this definition, isolated system containing cold water, and isolated system containing molten lava, share a common property, neither have any heat. That is not to say that the molten lava or the cold water do not contain energy. Both contain kinetic energy in the form of moving molecules, those of the molten lava of course would be moving much more rapidly. They also have other forms of energy such as the potential energy of their mass (E=MC^2) and potential energy from being in a gravitational field.

If the isolated molten lava system should come in contact with the isolated cool water system (thereby becoming thermally connected) heat is transferred from the Lava to the water until equilibrium in temperature is established. At this point, because we no longer have heat transfer, neither the Lava nor the water has any heat. The kinetic energy of the Lava due to molecular movement will have decreased and the kinetic energy of the water molecules will have increased such that the total energy of the new isolated lava/water system will remain the same. If this isolated system remains isolated (i.e. thermally disconnected from any other system) it would remain in this ‘heat death’, even though it still may have a good deal of molecular movement. Of course in the real world, all real processes are irreversible, entropy rules, and molecular movement will approach minimal temperature equilibrium.

In statistical thermodynamics, the property of entropy is defined in terms of probability. From this point of view the net increase in entropy that occurs during an irreversible process can be associated with a change of state of the molecules en masse from that of a less probable state to that of a more probable state. The more probable state of a cup of hot coffee will be at the same temperature as its surroundings.

This principle not only makes the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics TRUE, it applies equally to Information Theory because conveyance of information is dependant on molecular arrangements. By information I do not mean Shannon type information, but information as in applying meanings to arrangements of symbols (e.g. letters of the alphabet) or the extremely limited range of molecular arrangements that will bring about a living cell or any other particular type of living reproducing creature.

Physicist Richard P. Feynman explained entropy as the flow from order to disorder, from states of lower probability to states of higher probability. He gives the example of filming two gases, a gas of white particles and a gas of black particles, in a container separated by a boundary. He calls this state highly ordered as all the black particles in the container are all on one side and all the white particles are on the other side. When the boundary is removed, the particles will mix together, order decreases and disorder increases. This is considered an irreversible process. But Feynman has an objection, if you play the film backwards, the particles separate and all the white particles go to one side of the container and the black particles go to the other side of the container, and not only that, but careful observation shows that no physical laws are broken, all the particles are moving at just the right speed and are forming just the right collisions at just the right angle for this to happen. Thus the process is reversible and, Feynman adds, so are all the fundamental laws of physics. So what is it that makes the natural mixing of the two gases irreversible? Feynman's answer is `probability'. The number of states (particle distribution) of disorder far outnumbers the number of states of order, so much so that it becomes unrealistic to expect reversibility. The gases are moving from states of very low probability to states of much higher probability, from order to disorder. Feynman considered it a mystery how the universe as a whole began (i.e. Big Bang) in such a low state of entropy.

If there were many more `orderly' states that molecules can arrange themselves in than there were `disorderly' states for the molecules to arrange themselves into, then the natural flow would be from states of disorder to states of order. If this were true and we also define "Orderly" as the molecular states needed for the origin of life and for the origin species, then Evolution could be possible.

For example, when a large vase falls and smashes onto a stone floor, it would produce little tea cups if the probability of the molecules arranging themselves into cups was much higher as compared to any other possible configurations. But the laws of physics being what they are, the vase breaks up into many pieces of varying sizes and shapes that will be meaningless in terms of performing a useful function for human beings. The molecules of the vase have "naturally" undergone a change in arrangement from a specified complexity that performed a function for humans to a more probable disordered chaotic functionless arrangement. How much more so is this also true for living creatures?

In my 1973 NY City University college text book, “Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics” 2nd edition, 1973, John Wiley and Sons, the authors, Gordon J. Van Wylen and Richard E. Sonntag write:

“The final point to be made is that the second law of thermodynamics and the principle of increase in entropy have philosophical implications. Does the second law of thermodynamics apply to the universe as a whole? Are there processes unknown to us that occur somewhere in the universe, such as continual creation [e.g. Hoyle’s Steady State Theory) that have a decrease in entropy associated with them, and thus offset the continual increase in entropy that are associated with the processes known to us? If the 2nd Law is valid for the universe (of course we do not know if the universe can be considered an isolated system) how did it get in such a low state of entropy? On the other end of the scale, if all processes known to us have an increase in entropy associated with them, what is the future of the natural world as we know it?”

“Quite obviously it is impossible to give conclusive answers to these questions on the basis of the second law of thermodynamics alone. However, the authors see the second law of thermodynamics as man’s description of the prior work of a creator,who also holds the answer to the future destiny of man and the universe.”

Occasionally I read books by physicists, and when confronted with the Theory of Evolution, the physicists will soft peddle it by suggesting that a new Law of Nature may someday be found, an organizing principle by which Evolution may occur. They know there is a problem here for evolutionism. If Van Wylen and Sonntag can declare that the second law of thermodynamics implies a Creator’s hand at work in their thermodynamic textbook, used in advance science courses in public academia, we Creationists should not shrink back from declaring this also. Abiogenesis and The Theory of Evolution remain in violation of the second law of thermodynamics and are thereby scientifically falsified.

Example 2. 2nd Law Falsifies Evolution

The Theory of Evolution demands that since the very earliest life, new classes of proteins must have come into existence and new instructions must be continually encoded into DNA to produce novel physical features, organs, traits that we know have come to exist.

Hubert Yockey, in 1978, did theoretical calculations to determine the information content of cytochrome C while allowing for ambiguity. Mr. Yockey based his calculations on phylogenetic sequence comparisons. His calculations revealed that an undirected search arriving at this a protein has a probability of occurrence of 1 in 10^65.

Such a probability is certainly very damaging to any possibility of the evolution of a single Common Ancestry being at all plausible. To counter this, a scientist with excellent mathematical skills, Mr. Ken Dill, using different assumptions than Yockey, arrived at a 1 in 10^15 probability of finding via an undirected search a protein molecule the size of cytochrome C, which under other reasonable assumptions may occur as frequently as once every 32 years.

Yockey's analysis had more support from studies on the actual studies on varying amino acids in cytochrome C, but this was inconclusive and Dill's analysis may still be correct. Hard experimental data was needed to resolve this issue and Sauer, Reid et. al. provided the solid empirical data which turned out to confirm Yockey's analysis.

Robert T. Sauer and his M.I.T. team of biologists undertook the scientific research of substituting the 20 different types amino acids in two different proteins. upon each substitution, the protein sequence was reinserted into bacteria to be tested for function. They discovered that in some locations of the protein's amino acid chains, up to 15 different amino acids may be substituted while at other locations their was a tolerance of only a few, and yet other locations could not tolerate even one substitution of any other amino acid. One of the proteins they chose was the 92 residue lambda repressor.

Sauer et. al. calculated that:

"... there should be about 10^57 different allowed sequences for the entire 92 residue domain. ... the calculation does indicate in a qualitative way the tremendous degeneracy in the information that does specifies a particular protein fold. Nevertheless, the estimated number of sequences capable of adopting the lambda repressor fold is still an exceedingly small fraction, about 1 in 10^63, of the total possible 92 residue sequences."

Please note that this probability is simply of amino acids being aligned in the correct order, so that when folded, they will function as a protein. The folding mechanism is a seperate issue that is every bit unlikely to come ino existence via materilistic processes as the amino acids ever getting into a correct order.

Sauer et. al. go on to highlight that Yockey (1978) had obtained a similar result for cytochrome C.

Biologists R.T. Sauer, James U Bowie, John F.R. Olson, and Wendall A. Lim, 1989, 'Proceedings of the National Academy of Science's USA 86, 2152-2156. and 1990, March 16, Science, 247; and, Olson and R.T. Sauer, 'Proteins: Structure, Function and Genetics', 7:306 - 316, 1990.

This hard science is a striking confirmation of Yockey's theoretical work.

In summing up, I quote creationists Professors Percival Davis (Ph.D., Life Sciences) and Dean Kenyon (Ph.D. Biology) on the obvious implications of this Hard Science:

"These calculations [Sauer's] showed that the odds of finding a folded protein are about 1/10^65, a striking confirmation of Yockey's calculations. It means all proteins that have been examined to date, either by comparison of analogous sequences from different species, have been seen to be surrounded by an almost infinitely wide chasm of unfolded, nonfunctional, useless protein sequences. There are in fact no "stepping stones"! In other words, an undirected search will not hit upon any of the end protein sequences sought in the time allowed by the age of the universe. The various functional classes of proteins apparently are so isolated, they could not have risen from one another."

(Of Pandas and People, 1993 edition).

The 2nd Law falsifies Evolution. It falsifies abiogenesis and Evolution in that life as we observe it requires a flow of molecular arrangements from high probability molecular arrangements to ones of extraordinarily low probability states. In terms of energy, there is not enough energy and time in our galaxy (or Universe) to perform the work needed to make an undirected search for abiogenesis or the above described 'protein sequences' to find the necessary series of molecular arrangements reasonable probable.

The 2nd law is a central question for those who hold to spontaneous generation of life:

According to information theoretician & evolutionist- Hubert Yockey:

"An uninvited guest (Schroedinger, 1955; du Nouy,1947; Prigogine, and Nicolis 1971; Gatlin, 1972; Prigogine, Nicolis & Babyloyantz, 1972; Volkenstein, 1973) at any discussion of the origin of life and evolution from the materialistic reductionist point of view, is the role of thermodynamic entropy and the 'heat death' of the universe which it predicts. The universe should in every way go from states which are less probable to those which are more probable. Therefore, hot bodies cool; energy is conserved but becomes less available to do work. According to this uninvited guest, the spontaneous generation of life is highly improbable ( Prigogine, Nicolis, and Babyloyantz, 1972). The uninvited guest will not go away nor will the biological evidence to the contrary notwithstanding."

Nobel Laureate, Biologists Christian De Duve, in his 1995 book `Vital Dust', states that any and all scenarios for spontaneous generation [of life] must be certain that each step of the process flows from lower probability to higher probability so as not to violate the 2nd law.

I've provided only three falsifications of common Ancestry and Darwin's mechanism (Fossil record, 2nd Law, and scientific analysis of protein formation.)

Therefore the belief in evolution is one of faith in men, and my disbelief in Evolution is based on hard science, which seemingly corroborates that God Intelligently Designed the cosmos and Intelligently overcame the probability problems of the 2nd law by using His wisdom and intelligence to impose boundary conditions on the laws of physics in order to arrange molecues in very specific arrangements so that living creatures can reproduce, each according to their kind. Much the same way a scupltor sculpted four faces of US Presidents on Mt. Rushmore. Mt Rushmore - Intelligent Cause, Mt. Hood - Natural Cause.

Albert Einstein: Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.

FFT · Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 6:49 pm Post subject:

I'm not sure you could find any scientist that would say that the total entropy of the universe isn't increasing.

Further, no one seriously believes that proteins originated life, that idea was abandoned like a hundred years ago. So arguing about the chances of proteins spontaneously formed is quite frankly pretty dumb.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.

Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to.

bart007 · Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject:

Nobby · Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:14 pm Post subject:

I bart007, I've noticed that you've been a lot of cut & paste in your post. You have enough post now that you could use URL links that would save a lot of space.
This is in the system you must be here 7 days or have 10 posts to posts links.

Just post enough to get their attention then post a link so they read it all! Very Happy

_________________
Much Love Nobby
CVP Smilies
dictionary Bible

P1234567890 · Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject:

Bart, your mathematical arguments are fallacious. I know a little bit about computational biology, and none of the 'mathematical' arguments against abiogenesis hold any water. They are flawed on at least three levels:

1. They are talking about proteins, and nobody believes that the first self-replicating molecule was the protein named above.

2. The geometry of polypeptides precludes simplistic mathematical models from being used to analyze their probability of being spontaneously created.

3. Low probabilities are not an argument against something happening. The probability of your existence is far less than 10^-100, and yet there you are.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous.

FFT · Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:28 pm Post subject:

bart007 · Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:47 pm Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:25 pm Post subject:

FFT · Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 3:11 am Post subject:

bart007 · Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:56 am Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:25 pm Post subject:

Ana · Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:52 pm Post subject:

**crickets**
_________________
Truth doesn't care about theology, and theology doesn't care about truth.

FFT · Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:29 pm Post subject:

What a shocker!
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.

Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to.

bart007 · Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject:

Ana · Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: