At the ID blog Uncommon Descent, there have been several recent posts that attempt show that the 2nd law of thermodynamics (or 2LOT) poses a serious problem for proponents of biological evolution.
- niwrad: The illusion of organizing energy
- kairosfocus: Piotr (and KS, DNA_Jock, VS, Z et al) and “compensation” arguments vs the energy audit police . . .
- Granville Sewell: In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent Design, 2nd edition
ID (intelligent design) proponents claim that theirs is a scientific program. Yet they undermine that claim of science when they demonstrate their misunderstanding of 2LOT. It is well known among physicists that 2LOT does not pose any problems for the existence or evolution of biological life.
It is, of course, well understood that random motion of molecules is not life. Living things are not random. They extract energy from elsewhere (food, sunlight, etc) and use that energy to maintain their organization. 2LOT allows this. But this is what the ID proponents are arguing against.
Granville Sewell, in his post, shows photographs of Moore, OK before and after the tornado that destroyed the town.
It is certainly true that we observe that designed things decay over time. Sometime the decay is catastrophic, as with a tornado. Sometimes it is more gradual, as with the erosion damage to Mt. Rushmore.
We see this with all designed things, from your automobile to your computer, from your hand knit sweater to your house. There are no known exceptions. Using induction or abduction (the preferred “scientific” methodology of the ID proponents, we can reasonably conclude that all designed things decay over time.
This ought to pose an enormous problem for the proponents of intelligent design.