Ok second attempt I hope I don't delete this this time!

First of all though I detect some hostility in your tone which I find a bit baffling. This is (or should be) just an interesting interchange of ideas and beliefs, as someone who is interested in the subject I find this conversation stimulating but I in no way am annoyed or irritated by the fact you don't agree with me. And remember, you started this debate here I merely listed a website I enjoyed reading! This should just be a fun conversation, it is for me, please if it's annoying you then you don't to have to reply to me!

Anyway that said let me try and answer your points. I'll refer to the second law of thermodynamic as SLOTD for convenience and if anything I say sounds patrinising, please don't take it that way, I already assume you are well versed in the second law, I'm just trying to convince you that I am too!


Ok so in laymans terms the SLOTD states that everything in the universe is running down or going from a state of usueful energy to less useful energy. It teaches that all systems will lead to their most probable state, which is a state of randomness and that as systems increase in entropy there will be less available energy to do useful work.

In other words all systems lead to a state of increasing disorder, everything is running down.

Evolution flies completely counter to this law at every step of the way. I know we are not talking specifically about the Big Bang here but ultimately that is where the story of evolution begins so it must be considered in the light of this law.

So we start with a big bang, a huge violent explosions of gases and extremely dense matter that explodes in every direction. Now as anyone who has ever seen an explosion can testify they are anything but orderly! Yet evolution requires that out of this chaotic explosion things became infinitely more ordered and structured, galaxies and solar systems forming, each with their own stars and planets, all in neat orbits of each other. When it comes to actual life on earth we see the same problem, namely that organisms, despite existing in a universe where everything is decaying, actually increase in complexity and order evolving to a higher state of existant.

This is a complete antithesis of the SLOTD which says that left to its own devices this kind of order could not have occured.

As to what macro evolution is and is not I feel I understand well enough what it is, I just don't happen to agree with you that there is sufficent evidence to support it,especially as it contradicts the SLOTD as briefed above, has left little to no trace in the fossil record, and our own attempts to manipulate or force evolution have failed miserably. Any interbreeding of animal species always produces infertile offspring, experiments on fruit flies shows that they resist any effects of radiation once a few generations have passed and of course I don't see any biological evidence to support how such change could come about anyhow.


You want to stress that macro evolution occurs very gradually, that is fine but you cannot have your cake and eat it too. If it occurs gradually how is an organism to function for the millions of years in between evolving from one species to another?

How for example did the early dino birds survive before their wings were fully developed? Could you even draw me a series of drawings showing how a velocoraptor turned gradually into a bird all the time being fully adapted and suited to its own envirmental niche and able to survive and mate unimpeded by it's transmorphing?

Reptilian skin gradually over millions of years became feathers, bones gradually over millions of years became hollow, the lungs and respirotary systems gradually changed, the sex organs also gradually changing over millions of years and at every stage of development the dino bird was able to thrive in its enviroment and mate and reproduce healthy offspring.

As for the meal I ate three weeks ago, thats not a fair analogy. A scientist looking for transitional fossils is not looking for the equivalent of the particular meal that I ate three weeks ago, he's just looking for one meal that any one of the 6 billion people on earth ate in the past year or so, a much less daunting task.

All he needs is a single fossil find for a single species of any organism on earth, it's not nearly so daunting as finding one meal from a specific person.


As for me not applying the word random correctly I may be wrong but I don't think I once mentioned the word 'random' in this thread until this post in relation to thermodynamics, a correct application I may add. Please show me where I keep using the word random or am showing signs of misunderstanding it

Regarding mutations and whether they are passed on or not I would say I understand this area pretty well, for a layman at least. The best known example of a 'positive' mutation in the scientific literature is that of the Sickle Cell, and in Africa this particular mutation has spread as it's immunises the sufferer against Malaira, thus it's a trait that been passed down through succesive generations.

It should be pointed out however that sickle cell is a life threatening disease and that it doesn't actually provide protection as such, its just that red blood cells in a sicle cell sufferer are so diseased that the malaria virus cannot incubate in them. The life expectancy for an adult male malaria sufferer is 42 years, so hardly a positive mutation but hey this all the best one that scientiest have!


You mentioned earlier tha DNA sequences can occur that were not there before. Can you provide an example of a 'beneficial' mutation that has occured in this manner? I'm not talking a sickle cell type damagin mutation here, just a purely positive change in an organism that resulted from new DNA being added?

It shouldn't be hard to name one, actually there should be untold billions of examples seeing as the entirety of life on earth has evolved in this way so I'd love to hear you name a dozen or so.


Finally I hope you don't see this debate as antagonistic or hostile, I love debating this stuff, I find it intellectually stimulating and it's a pleasure to meet someone as knowledgeble as yourself who just happens to sit on the other side of the fence to me. I respect you views, although I disagree with them, but what fun would life be if we were all the same anyways