If you were anything other than an ignorant fool you would understand that the reorganization of matter does not constitute a violation of the 2nd law, and that the universe is a closed system. The earth exists within the universe, and as such is NOT immune from any of the laws of nature. However, I have seen this argument from you ETB trolls before, proclaiming that the earth is not in itself a closed system and then pretending that you are the only people who know that. You then pat each other on the back and worship your own profundity.
In other words, the first ETB defacates, the second rolls in it and the third eats it.
External energy feeds to the earth as it is DEPLEATED from the sun, since energy is never created or destroyed. However, by playing this disengenuous "open system / closed system" game you pretend that you know something somebody eles doesn't. The analogy was stupid and infantile. It did nothing more than reaffirm that you people don't have the slightest idea of which you speak.
brilliantLiberal, Free Conservatives 13 Comments
[10/31/2005 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
doctor - get this man a textbook, stat!
10/31/2005 3:59:20 PM
You really think a textbook would help (unless you beat him upside the head with it)?
10/31/2005 5:41:05 PM
Might not help him but hitting him would still be nice :)
Crap, I'm the \"third ETB\". Guess I gotta eat it...
10/31/2005 6:36:27 PM
Wow, what an idiot. The universe is a closed system, but the earth is not, so energy from the sun enters the earth, and is then radiated outwards. Also, the formation of complexity actually increases entropy, not decreases it.
10/31/2005 7:38:53 PM
I just want to know who pleated the sun in the first place, and why...
10/31/2005 8:49:52 PM
bio - I shouldn't have laughed at that but i couldn't help myself. You are evil. Keep it up.
10/31/2005 9:38:54 PM
1) The Earth isn't a closed system. The Second Law only states that the entropy of a closed system must increase over time. A system with a net energy intake can have an entropy decrease at the same time. (If this weren't true, I'm fairly certain refrigerators wouldn't exist.)
2) Characterizing entropy as \"disorder\" is a bit disingenuous ... it's a measure of microscopic (not macroscopic) disorder. Things that appear very ordered to us can actually have much higher entropy than things that appear chaotic.
3) WTF is an ETB?
11/1/2005 12:13:58 AM
Once again we see someone who could easily have avoided looking like an idiot had he just listened to They Might Be Giants...
11/1/2005 4:37:25 AM
>>Once again we see someone who could easily have avoided looking like an idiot had he just listened to They Might Be Giants...<<
I am sure he still would have managed. The only hope for his image would be to unplug his keyboard. He doesn't even realize that he argues against one of his own points(Saying the earth is a closed system that has a net intake of energy.) He is arguing that the earth is a closed system, so apparently these ETBs(what does that mean?) really are the only ones who know that it is not a closed system
11/1/2005 5:47:04 AM
Even if it is a closed system, the sun is so large that it can keep this reaction up for several hundred millenia, hence you might just consider the fact it is an open system.
11/2/2005 2:18:27 AM
ETB=Evolution Theory Believer
as in \"Evolution is a religion\"
12/20/2005 9:34:06 AM
By looking at the post and then the mindless, ignorant responses to it, it's very clear who the ignorant and infantile are. By the way. Did none of you learn that the introduction of raw energy is nearly always deleterious to a system?
1/24/2008 9:09:02 PM
Demented YentaDid none of you learn that the introduction of raw energy is nearly always deleterious to a system?
@#418324: Perhaps you've heard of the Sun?
It's a very, very large fusion generator. Without it, nothing much would be happening here. Perhaps you might enjoy looking it up sometime.
Also, while you're there, you might want to look at the entries for open systems
and closed systems.
1/24/2008 9:44:42 PM