Arguments 'evolutionists' should NOT use

That depends on what is meant by disorder. It seems to me that it would not be compltely unreasonable to make a case for defining disorder as identical with entropy. The traditional formulation states that there are some thermodynamic states that cannot be achieved from a given initial state without some colateral change happening elsewhere in the system. Once you lieve the system open, the colateral effects might be happening where you are not looking, and, therefore, the naive interpretation of the 2LoT (no increas in order) falls apart. That`s exaclty the point that one should be making to the naive creationist.I think that pointing out that the earth is not a closed system is the proper response to bogus claims that the 2LoT is violated by the theory of evolution.Edited by fallacycop, : typos

Needless to state that this definition would be completely useless for someone that didn`t already know what entropy is to begin with.Answer me this question: How does that definition accounts for the increase in entropy that happens when you mix to different gases? What about the increase in entropy that happens whn you shuffle a deck of cards?Entropy is not a measure of a system's thermal energy per unit temperature that is unavailable for doing useful work. It doesn`t even have the right units to be a measure of energy (That might be more apropriate as a definition for free energy, but even there, only in a lose sense).Entropy is a measure of the number of microstates (a complete description of the state of the system) of a system consistent with a given macrostate (a thermodynamic description of the system). Since there are many more states consistent with disorder then there are states consistent with order, it seems not entirely inapropriate to identify entropy with disorder.