The Second Law of Thermodynamics Does Not Prohibit Evolution

In order to prove that the 2nd law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution I must prove two things: 1.The origin of life is relevant to evolution 2.The 2nd law prohibits the origin of life Many evolutionists try to put aside the issue of the origin of life from non-living chemicals claiming that it is irrelevant. However, evolution assumes that there is already a living, self-replicating organism to begin with. Various evolutionists also agree on this statement. Gordy Slack, an evolutionist says, "I think it is disingenuous to argue that the origin of life is irrelevant to evolution. It is no less relevant than the Big Bang is to physics or cosmology. Evolution should be able to explain, in theory at least, all the way back to the very first organism that could replicate itself through biological or chemical processes. And to understand that organism fully, we would simply have to know what came before it. And right now we are nowhere close."[1] In addition zoologist and physiologist (and evolutionist) Gerald Kerkut defined in the General Theory of Evolution as "the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form". [2] It is also worthy to note that scientific magazines such as the Scientific American whenever they create an issue that focused on evolution such as the September 1978 issue, there is an article that talks about chemical evolution and the origin of life. [3] Back billions of years ago when Earth was a primordial soup, it could be seen as an open system. However, the law of entropy does not only apply to isolated systems but open systems as well. Dr. John Ross of Harvard university explains this when he says, "there are no known violations of the second law of thermodynamics. Ordinarily the second law is stated for isolated systems, but the second law applies equally well to open systems. " There is somehow associated with the field of far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics the notion that the second law of thermodynamics fails for such systems. It is important to make sure that this error does not perpetuate itself." [4] Open systems still tend towards disorder. An example of this is crystallization where local order increases at the expense of increased disorder in its surroundings. The issue is not the energy required to form the complex molecules for life, but the fact that this energy is undirected. Raw energy itself cannot account for the specified information in living things. Rather it breaks them down. For example, you do not become more complex by just standing out in the sun. In fact, the raw energy of ultraviolet waves damage DNA leading to skin cancer. On the other hand, if you are a plant with chloroplasts that can harness the sun"s energy to produce sugars. Because the law of entropy prohibits lifeless chemicals forming together into the first life form it therefore prohibits evolution. Sources: 1.Slack, G., What neo-creationists get right, The Scientist, 20 June 2008; 2.Kerkut, G.A., Implications of Evolution, Pergamon, Oxford, p.157, 1960. 3.http://www.scientificamerican.com... 4.John Ross, Chemical and Engineering News, 7 July 1980, p. 40; cited in Duane Gish, Creation Scientists Answer their Critics Institute for Creation Research, 1993