Abiogenesis Violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Welcome to EvC heygabbagabba! There are lots of opportunities for fun and learning here.We are rather fussy about OPs(opening posts) since we like to keep each topic focused. The admins will help you focus your topic a bit before we let it go to the hungry hoards. .You have the 2nd law as the focus of your topic title however, you never state what the 2nd law is in your OP. That is one thing you should do. Just edit it in and then reply to me and an admin will take another look.You should then show how that law supports each of your statements in each paragraph.One problem is that the 2nd law only limits the behavior of free engery in a closed system (and actually not even that). So as soon as you allow for outside energy you are removing any limits that the 2nd law might cause.There may be good reasons why each issue you raise are actually issues but since you remove the second law as a possibility in your first sentence you'll have to come back to supplying a reason separately OR show how the 2nd law actually supports your claims. Again, you'll have to start by stating what the second law is.In your last paragraph you bring intelligent design into it and say that overcomes any laws of thermodynamics. However, you never clarify what allows the designer involved to by pass the laws. Maybe you should leave the last paragraph out and concentrate on the first 3?You also need to be sure you have your facts clear. Combining molescules does NOT always require energy. You'd be dead if it did. Explain why the particular processes you are talking about require it.Then change the title to match what you are actually talking about please. Thanks for the input.

Yes, you've clarified it some.However, you still haven't stated (at least not clearly) just what the second law is. You have stated that heat doesn't flow from cold to hot places. But you have not yet made it clear why this is a problem for abiogenesis. You have simply said that it is. Simply saying something without giving reasons doesn't make for a very good discussion.You will be asked to actually support what you say so before I release this topic it would be a good idea for you to show that you can. You make this statement for example. This is contradicted by facts as far as I know. You'll have to answer that problem. You'll have to explain this too. No one in response to you will suggest that the 2nd law is wrong. But with free energy the second law is not, by itself, a restriction on anything. That is the issue you have to answer. I asked you to show just exactly how the 2nd law says things like the above. You simply made the claim again. In the science threads you have to actually support what you say not simply assert them. Thermodynamics may very well be involved as an issue for abiogenesis (in fact I am darned sure it is) but you haven't shown how it is. I am very sure that it isn't an issue that is simply a result of the 2nd law. If it is you'll have to show how.Thanks for the clarification. You second go is better than the first.Edited by AdminNosy, : spelling again

The refutation of the claim that the 2nd law is any kind of a problem has been done a jillion times. It's already been discussed on EvC a lot.This thread might do: Thermodynamics, Abiogenesis and EvolutionWhat you've demonstrated here is that you are too lazy to actually learn something about the topic you want to discuss. I'm not going to let others waste their time with you on this topic.You can post to the thread above but you should read it first. It's old and you should ignore everthing written by Brad McFall though.