Do you believe the second law of thermodynamics makes Evolution impossible?

Ah, so simple minded. There are more forces at work here than just simple entropy. You forget the influence of the individual molecules and how they want to join up because of enthalpy (caused by intra-molecular attractions).

Sorry to burst your simple-minded bubble.

Maybe, before you ask these questions, you should actually investigate the very premise of your misconceptions. But then, that's not the way of christianity, is it? Learning anythning about science might shake the foundations of your faith, and you fear that.

actually, Fred pretty much nailed it. The universe, being a closed system, can never evolve. No energy or matter is being poured into or introduced to the universe so it is doomed to continue expanding until the eventual heat death occurs. It may or may not snap back and contract at that point, but at the moment, such a reversal seems impossible. None the less, the universe IS an example of an isolated system that is subject to "decay" or equilibration. Unfortunately... that has nothing to do with evolution on earth, since that is a completely different system. The system of evolution on earth GAINS constant energy from the Sun and mass or matter from space such as meteors and asteroids. As far as Mr Brauhn's muddled comprehension goes.... his misconceptions pretty much collapse around the statement... "Certainly there are those who argue that the universe evolved out of a random process, but what random process could produce the brain of a man or the system or the human eye?" He has it almost exactly backwards, probably deliberately... the universe was produced through a random process and the human brain or eye evolved over time. By inverting the two processes, of course he makes it appear impossible.

It is occasionally claimed that the second law is incompatible with autonomous self-organisation, or even the coming into existence of complex systems. This is a common creationist argument against evolution.[9] The entry self-organisation explains how this claim is a misconception. In fact, as hot systems cool down in accordance with the second law, it is not unusual for them to undergo spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. for structure to spontaneously appear as the temperature drops below a critical threshold. Complex structures, such as Bénard cells, also spontaneously appear where there is a steady flow of energy from a high temperature input source to a low temperature external sink.

Furthermore, the concept of entropy in thermodynamics is not identical to the common notion of "disorder". For example, a thermodynamically closed system of certain solutions will eventually transform from a cloudy liquid to a clear solution containing large "orderly" crystals. Most people would characterize the former state as having "more disorder" than the latter state. However, in a purely thermodynamic sense, the entropy has increased in this system, not decreased. The units of measure of entropy in thermodynamics are "units of energy per unit of temperature". Whether a human perceives one state of a system as "more orderly" than another has no bearing on the calculation of this quantity. The common notion that entropy in thermodynamics is equivalent to a popular conception of "disorder" has caused many non-physicists to completely misinterpret what the second law of thermodynamics is really about.

I'll turn this on its head... It should be noted that not only does it only apply to closed system(s), but also only to large scale and/or long term observation (which may be part of why it took so long to develop the theorem of the laws of thermodynamics). I'll use the universe as our large scale, long term, evidence.

Possibilities:

1. Universe is a closed system. (Absolute natural order)

2. Universe is an open system. (Absolute, not necessarily entirely divine, created order)

3. Universe is an open system that appears closed. (Relativistic dynamic system underutilized, poorly understood by humans - irrational evolutionary system)

4. Universe is a closed system that appears open. (Relativistic appearance, but absolute order - See Parmenides)

5. Kafkaesque...

Given the current state of science, theology, and their meeting point of cosmology etc. there is insufficient evidence for any of the 4 to be exclusively true, but all have some verification, so the answer is number 5 for the majority, but I like 4 which implies all the above depending on understanding... Use a dictionary/encyclopedia if needed...

If there was no order, there'd be no theology or science, the only question is the source of the order which is essential... Is order emergent, a first principle, or both? Both is the necessary answer in an apparently evolutionary system...

Yes, even emergent properties must be originated potentially in first principles, yet manifest as emergent...

So contrary to what others have said, the second law/theorem implies evolution (and regression), not the other way around, or denying it. At least so long as the potential of a latent reality of order of the entropy in the system, appears/manifests itself to the observant of the process - emphasis on process - which in humans the observed and observer is often the same thing, but that brings us to the border of physics and psychology...

Delinquent minds are not fit to understand mysteries. Only the wholly honest and unbiased are so fit. If you want something to be true it will often appear that way to you despite the [overlooked] evidence.

God bless.

Entropy (randomness) definately makes Evolution and the Big Bang possible even with the law stating that energy cannot be created. This is what scientests believe is the most likely answer but another alternative is that energy has always existed in the universe, just when it was extremely small.

Turtles Hit the nail on the head!

Of course the problem is that many people don't even understand the second law of thermodynamics, and then it is often very confusing because of localised gravity effects!

(when looking at it Universally)

But simple people like simple things, a the he done! it is just great for them!

I don't know if the second law of thermodynamics is even relevant to the probability of "human evolution" ... but it makes the future degenerate era in the evolution of the universe certain

After about a Google number of years and its lights out folks.

Sorry Pal. Not impossible. .

Good try though. Your can change the order and complexity of ice crystals with the environment, thoughts and emotions.

Dr. Masaru Emoto discovered that crystals formed in frozen water reveal changes when specific, concentrated thoughts are directed toward them. He found that water from clear springs and water that has been exposed to loving words shows brilliant, complex, and colorful snowflake patterns. In contrast, polluted water, or water exposed to negative thoughts, forms incomplete, asymmetrical patterns with dull colors.

Do you really need to have a star?

Creationist tend to quote the "introductory" version of the second law of thermodynamics and fail to realize that is much more complex than what is presented in high or middle schools.

No, the laws of thermodynamics have no relation to evolution, nor do snowflakes. Evolution only concerns living organisms.

Good counter, Mr. Monopoly.

Some of the people answering here are obviously struggling with the entire content of your argument.

The second law argument is flawed in so many ways, including the one that you state, and the one made by "Turtles All the Way Down", that it makes no sense to even bother taking it apart. It's like trying to dismantle a house of cards.