"BRAINIAC" wrote in message
...
On 2 Apr, 18:31, "adman" wrote:
"BRAINIAC" wrote in message

...
| On 2 Apr, 16:33, "adman" wrote:
| Second Law of Thermodynamics supports the supernatural model of
origins.
|
| What evidence do you have for this statement?
|
| 1. There is no natural means to increase usable energy in a closed
system.
|
| This is incorrect, the definition of a closed system in thermodynamics
| is one that can exchange energy but not matter with its surroundings.

An exchange is hardly an increase

When the word exchange is used in this context it means that the
movement of energy can go in either direction.

A redirection of your original meaning.

nuff said.


|
| Therefore the energy content of a closed system can vary in either
| direction depending on what the state of its surroundings may be at
| any time.

Incorrect. The energy level stays the same

If you have a closed system energy can cross the boundary in either
direction, only with an isolated system does the total energy content
remain constant, and that is because nothing can cross the boundary in
either direction.

What boundry? This is a "closed" system we are talking about.

|
| 2. The universe is decreasing in usable energy.
|
| Only because it is an isolated system that is not in equilibrium.
|
| 3. Therefore, the initial energy of the universe must have originated
| supernaturally.
|
| You have been adamant that no one can provide evidence for what
| existed before the universe as we know it began.

I have been adamant that the singularity is not proven nor is there
evidence
of singularity

Which amounts to the same thing, as the singularity (theoretically)
existed before the universe began.

You cannot be this dumb as to say the singularity existed before anything
existed.

Which is what you said above, You claim in another post not to play word
games, yet here you are playing games.

Why is that? Too ashamed to admit i am correct?


|
| How about you now provide the evidence that supports your contention
| that the universe had a supernatural beginning.

The facts fit that theory

This theory that the universe had a supernatural origin cannot be
tested or falsified, and so is not a scientific theory.

Backward thinking..

Second Law of Thermodynamics supports the supernatural model of origins.


|
| Make sure that it is sound scientific evidence.

Science is man made. How do you supose to explain the supernatural with a
man made tool?

Well you seem to be trying to shoehorn the supernatural into the
scientific arena, so perhaps you can explain how you expect people to
accept something that cannot be tested and falsified in the proper
manner.


Not so. I simply try to explain what science theorizes about.



|
| 4. The creation model conforms to the data.
|
| Evolution proposes only natural explanations.
|
| The whole of science proposes only natural explanations.

Exactly. Which does not fit te model for supernatural model of origins
|
| Therefore, evolution contradicts a natural law.
|
| Which natural law is evolution supposedly contradicting?

Can't you read?

I can, but you haven't stated which natural law evolution is supposed
to contradict.

Yes i have. The Second Law of Thermodynamics supports the supernatural
model of origins.



|
| Models that contradict data are unscientific.
| Therefore, evolution as a model of origins is unscientific
|
| And as your "model" is not supported by the available data will you
| accept it is not scientific?

Re-Read above. That is the support.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics supports the supernatural model of
origins.

No it does not, your source has misquoted the second law, and has used
the wrong system definition with respect to the nature of the
universe, and has stated incorrectly "There is no natural means to
increase usable energy in a closed system."

I would suggest that you consider examining some other sites that
explain the science of thermodynamics correctly.

And while we are on the subject of science, if science is wrong
because it only uses natural explanations, then how can you (or the
author of the website you cite) use science to support a supernatural
origion for the universe?

It does not. It uses science to DISprove science's claim that the
supernatural is invalid.
Which is why the definition of a closed system in thermodynamics is one that
can exchange energy but not matter with its surroundings.

Why are you so stubbornly refusing this information?






..

|
| http://www.mbbc.us/creation/presentation.htm
|