/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10209146
not bad

>>10209146
Is this the power of burgers?

>>10209146
> This principle correctly predicts that heat will never flow from a cold body to a warmer one, unless forced to do so by a man-made machine.
God I fucking hate conservatards so much. They make it impossible to side against the left on anything because to do so would mean having to associate myself with nanowits like this.

where can I get Intellifuck?

>>10209146
I'm insterested in intellifuck

>>10209692
>I don't want to associate with retards
>So I associate with other retards

brilliant.

>2LT disproves theory of relativity
>the earth is a closed system so evolution violates 2LT
lol
>>10209729
Not what he said at all. How dumb are you?

>>10209753
>I tend not to use entropy arguments at all for biological systems. I have yet to see the calculations involving either heat transfer or Boltzmann microstates involved for natural selection. Until creationists can do that, they should refrain from claiming that organic evolution contradicts the Second Law; a trite appeal to “things become more disordered according to the Second Law” is inadequate

>The main argument against evolution using the second law of thermodynamics is that evolution requires a decrease in entropy (disorder). However, the second law of thermodynamics states that entropy increases, so the two are contradictory. These resources misrepresent the Second Law of Thermodynamics, ignoring the fact the earth is not an isolated system (energy is added from the sun for example).

tl;dr kys retard

>>10209787
>However, the second law of thermodynamics states that entropy increases, so the two are contradictory
But that argument is nonsense. Whoever said this is an idiot. And you're an idiot for not questioning it. Nothing in 2LT says the entropy of an open system cannot decrease. Of course, you would already know that if you had a basic education.

>>10209787
>chastising me for not reading an entire conservapedia article
For what purpose?

>>10209753
>>10209787
To be fair the article makes both statements.

>Another way of viewing the Second Law is in terms of probability. In nature there is no one to clean up the universe, only chances. The chance of something becoming orderly is essentially zero, which it is a certainty that things will become more disorderly.

>On a universal scale a tidy room would be a universe which has pockets of above average concentrations of energy (if you - incorrectly - assume relativity E=mc2 this includes matter as well.)

I'm triggered

>>10209146
Lost it at no bone rot

>complains about liberals applying thermodynamics to economics
>immediately does the same thing to genetics

>>10209146
Based and intellifucked

Who writes this shit? I have a hard time believing it's someone other than a blatant troll.

>>10211618
It's a Christian thing. They love misrepresenting science to support their beliefs