Want Some Answers ???


Hi Andrew.

Thanks for your comment. You wrote,

>>Dear Mark Regarding the '2nd law of thermodynamics'. I find the terminology confusing myself - but in one of your recent published dialogues you use the terms 'order' and 'complexity' as if they were synonymous. In the physics of entropy they are diametrically opposite.<<

I believe '
order and complexity' are synonymous. I can refer to the 'complexity' within a simple cell, as too complex to have occurred by chance. And refer to a simple cell as too 'orderly' to have occurred by chance. Both similar.

Evolution demands an upward trend - increasing order and complexity (although never proven or observed). But 'the physics of entropy' goes the other way – downward – decreasing order and complexity (proven and observed).

>>The second law suggests that systems tend to change from ordered, simple, low information systems –low entropy- to disordered, complex, high information, -high entropy- ones.<<

Not so, 'the second law' proves that 'order', 'complexity' or 'information' never arise from disorder. Evolutionary theory teaches that disorder creates order. So it's not correct scientifically. Over time all complex 'systems' run down and die. All information systems require an intelligence to create them to start with. The intelligent information in the DNA code had to exist before the living system can function.

>>We therefore expect entropic decay to take simple ordered systems and produce disordered complex systems with high information content. This would put the 2nd law in favour of abiogenesis. yours sincerely Andrew<<

But any
'complex system' must be designed to use energy or it doesn't exist. Complex systems are not produced just by energy input. Random energy pouring into a system will increase the tendency to destructuring of matter to disorder, unless it is harnessed by a specific mechanism.

Eg, if water flows down-hill naturally, we might be able to pump it up-hill with a motor and the right machinery. So,
complex machines can be forced to arise from simple matter by appropriating programmed machinery. But the programmed machinery (or 'complex system' or living organisms) cannot arise from non-living matter in the absence of such a mechanism. To achieve that would require the direct input of mind or intelligence.

So life always comes from life, never non-life. Evolutionists once believed that maggots came out of dirt [life from matter, '
abiogenesis'] until a Christian called 'Pastuer' proved they were from eggs laid by flies. All ideas of 'abiogenesis' that life comes from matter are still theories in the minds of the hopeful, who want to exclude God from His creation.

Hope this clears up any misunderstanding.

Mark Purchase

His Reply