WHEN WILL YOU BRAINLETS LEARN THAT MATH PROVES EVOLUTION A LIE?

jewish nonsense spawned to protect the torah

>>8885003
Weak bait.

File: tmp_9671-1487676651874597488080.jpg (128KB, 543x603px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 543x603px

>>8885012
Not really. The arguments are clear and compelling!

>>8885003
You're a brainlet who doesn't understand the concept of entropy.

The idea of Evolution is self-refuting.

>>8885003
>second law of thermodynamics proves
Lrn2thermo, retard
then Lrn2proof

>>8885003
>magic is somehow a more plausible answer than natural physics
Every time

>>8885003
Holy fuck what is that first author smoking

First he quotes people explaining how evolution doesn't violate the second law because the net entropy change of the earth-sun system is vastly positive.

Then he dismisses it with a totally retarded analogy.

>Of course the whole idea of compensation, whether by distant or nearby events, makes no sense logically: an extremely improbable event is not rendered less improbable simply by the occurrence of ‘‘compensating’’ events elsewhere. According to this reasoning, the second law does not prevent scrap metal from reorganizing itself into a computer in one room, as long as two computers in the next room are rusting into scrap metal—and the door is open.

He's missing the point that the sun is both an entropy generator and a supplier of huge amounts of energy to the earth which powers the creation of more ordered chemical structures. No one is saying a random increase in entropy at one point can be tied to a random decrease of energy at another point. The whole point of the sun-earth entropy idea is that they are linked by a transfer of energy.

Also quick googling shows me the author is basically an anti-Darwinism sperglord who is trying to find any way to "disprove" evolution.

Trash/10

>>8885003
http://physics.gmu.edu/~roerter/EvolutionEntropy.htm

>>8885003
>You don't even understand evolution ha ha it's flawed
>We have proven it wrong

See the problem there?

File: bait_perfect.jpg (375KB, 440x3266px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 440x3266px

>>8885313
>>8885026
>Earth
>Closed system

I swear, the second law is the most abused by people who don't understand it. And it's not even absolute...

File: trolling-in-my-day.jpg (91KB, 625x416px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 625x416px

>>8885003
> hand waving arguments
> a few irrelevant equations sprinkled about to make it look rigorous
> "intelligent design" crank

You are going to have to do better than this OP

>>8885311

His argument is just as Rational as any found in the canon of Scientism.

>>8885003
>Humongous hydrogen fusion reactor constantly bombarding us with free thermal energy

>Second law of thermodynamics

>>8885326
>He still thinks the second law only applies to a closed system

Any irreversible process results in a net increase in entropy

>>8885003
>post shitty "paper" (it's a letter you idiot) on shitty "journal" ("letters" in applied mathematics, isn't even about math but philosophy of physics ???)

>it's even withdrawn http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0893965911000243

>decide to post most essay shit in another "journal"

fuck off you imbecile

>>8885003
>The second law of thermodynamics proves that evolution is a lie.
It really, really doesn't, and this crackpot doesn't have the vaguest idea of how thermodynamics works.

>>8885990
The process of an organism living, dying, and decomposing is irreversible and results in a net increase in entropy. Of you are only going to certain parts of that process then a closed system or a system in equilibrium is required. Living things are neither.

File: 1483192078969.gif (2MB, 514x205px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 514x205px

>>8885999
The article was peer reviewed and accepted for publication until some computer science programmer / >>>/g/ autist sperged out and started an online campaign to harass the editors until it was pulled. A lawsuit was filed and the journal was forced to pay up and issue a public apology.

>>8886189
>Peer reviewed in three weeks
>Peer reviewed without anyone raising objections to the completely false account of entropy and lack of mathematical material
Nah son.

File: qtpillow.jpg (52KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 600x338px

>>8886225
You're wrong

>The purpose of Applied Mathematics Letters is to provide a means of rapid publication for important but brief applied mathematical papers. The brief descriptions of any work involving a novel application or utilization of mathematics, or a development in the methodology of applied mathematics is a potential contribution for this journal. This journal's focus is on applied mathematics topics based on differential equations and linear algebra. Priority will be given to submissions that are likely to appeal to a wide audience.

Care to try again?

>>8885003
Well I'm glad the sun doesnt exist

>>8886244
That sounds exactly like the spiel for a journal with nearly nonexistent peer review standards.

>>8886225
How about that it was peer reviewed and yet not immediately rejected because it's not a good fit for the journal?

File: 1487715579224.png (41KB, 724x524px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 724x524px

>>8886259
>not an argument
Care to try again?

>>8886332
I'm not trying to make an argument, just providing an observation. The observation being "based on the claims of that journal, it would appear that no significant peer review took place".

File: cAlE40O.jpg (163KB, 1515x1078px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1515x1078px

>>8886340
The journal admitted in the lawsuit that peer review did take place. Moreover, see >>8886189

Should a >>>/g/ sperglord have the ability to silence peer reviewed science because her feelings were hurt?

>>8886343
>The journal admitted in the lawsuit that peer review did take place.
Notice that I specified significant peer review. I'm sure someone glanced over it at some point.

>Moreover, see >>8886189
What does that have to do with the inferred peer review standards of the journal? Seems off topic.

>>8886353
>Seems off topic
Not off topic but very relevant to your claims about laxed peer review. There's a lot of history behind the alleged retraction.

>>8886364
My judgment of lax peer review was not based on the retraction (I didn't even know that). It is based on that snippet in >>8886244, combined with the fact that the journal accepted a paper as obviously nonsensical as this.

>>8886343
Should we have needed a >>>/g/ sperglord to make them retract an article that clearly should not have made it through any peer review?

>>8886374
Who are you to decide what should and should not be published?

>>8886189
>>8886343
>peer reviewed means holy
it's a shitty fourth rate "journal" that publishes "letters" and discussions, not articles
there's nothing to review, it's diatribe
fuck off

>>8886860
it's shit. not even pseudoscience because it's not even trying to be science

File: primes_are_like_weed_lmao.png (859KB, 1296x797px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 1296x797px

>>8886873
Uh no try again buddy. It's a respected journal. Something you will never publish in. Maybe if you stopped being jealous of Granville Sewell, then you can have some success of your own!

>>8886873
>tfw these days peer review means your credit card payment went through and your email didn't bounce

>>8886860
It's not even a fit for the journal.

>>8887584
Actually it was a fit for the journal otherwise they would not have accepted it for publication!

>>8885003
>that first paper

I have no words to express the mental retardation & gimnastics this guy has done in order to """""""disprove""""""" evolution.

>>8887298
>respected journal

ok confirmed for talking out of your ass.
First of all, there's no such thing as "respected journal" in applied math. All the hot shit get's published in Nature, Science and biochemistry publications. This leaves applied math journals as bottom of the barrel. In fact I have seen such poor quality papers published in "good" journals that I questioned what I was even doing in this field to begin with.

Not only that, some of my teachers "peer review" process was superficially (when not partially) reading the paper in a couple hours and give the OK if there weren't extremely flagrant problems. One of them (a woman of course) even said "I saw a lot of math I didn't really understand so I approved it anyway XD".
That is a titular professor in a university, doing applied math.

>>8885003

Creationists always try to use the 2nd law
To disprove evolution but their theory has a flaw
The Earth's not a closed system it's powered by the sun
So fuck the damn Creationists
Doomsday get my gun

>>8888257
>All the hot shit get's published in Nature, Science and biochemistry publications.
OH WOW M8. I will be sure to look out for the next hot shit proof in Mathematics in those journals.

If anyone is talking out their arse its you, as you should know those are mostly science not math journals.

File: cheers.jpg (223KB, 640x429px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 640x429px

>>8888264
>The Earth's not a closed system
Try again brainlet. The earth is a closed system.

Source: https://www.uvm.edu/~cmehrten/courses/earthhist/Earth%20Closed%20System.pdf

>>8888396
>as you should know those are mostly science not math journals.
>mostly science not math journals.
>mostly science not math
>mostly
I think that was his point, retard. He's saying that unless the math paper has some incredible breakthrough, it's going to be published in the shitty low tier journals. And the fact that the journal is shitty and low tier means the peer review process is also shitty and low tier.

File: too_intelligent.jpg (70KB, 559x836px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 559x836px

>>8888450
>He's saying that unless the math paper has some incredible breakthrough, it's going to be published in the shitty low tier journals
So you're saying since Wiles proof of FLT was not published in Nature, then it was not a meaningful result/not an incredible breakthrough?

Seriously man, you're fucking deluded if you really believe that nonsense!

>>8888240
Actually it wasn't, otherwise it wouldn't have been withdrawn.

Thermo disproves it, but so does geology.

http://vixra.org/abs/1602.0132
The Truth About Evolution

>>8885003
HAHAHAHAHAHA...seriously, good joke. Sci needs more good humour - this really hit the spot. I'll bet it even fools a few people...reminds me of the Onion.

File: rInr1iQ.png (236KB, 447x404px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 447x404px

>>8889230
No fucktard, it was accepted via peer review for publication before some spectrum residing, "boogie wanna be", sperg lord freaked out and got all the other tards of similar intelligence as >>>/g/ involved because it hurt reddit's feelings.

File: Picture_11.png (192KB, 391x392px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 391x392px

>>8889257
>vixra.org/

LOOK BRAINLET!!!

I AM ARGUING WITH OTHERS ABOUT CREDIBLE SOURCES, BUT WE ALL AGREE THAT vixra.org IS ABSOLUTE SHIT. SAVE YOUR PRIDE AND EXIT NOW.

File: 1457311653242.jpg (8KB, 250x237px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x237px

>>8885003
>The second law of thermodynamics proves that evolution is a lie.

>>8889400
Hey if he's anything like me, his university is banned from arXiv.

it doesnt violate thermodynamics because earth is not a closed system
it's literally right in the fucking law

jesus christ this board has gotten really terrible over the last 3~ years

>>8889463
>university is banned from arXiv
where do you go? btw mate that's a bad sign!

>>8889508
It's a ban because someone had a script downloading from it, and of course, we all share an IP.

The sun inputs energy

>>8889485
The earth is a closed system. This was already resolved in this thread.

>>8890563
It's not though.

>>8890788
It was proven to be a closed system earlier in the thread. Do you need a link?

>>8888413
>the earth is a closed system.
your idiocy just blotted out the Sun..

>>8891703
Not really mate. Reread the thread!

>>8892755
>>8891271
>>8890563
fuck off. repeating that over and over doesn't make it true.

File: You cannot bait me.png (203KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 600x600px

let's see how many people continue to get baited

sage

>>8892761
see >>8888413

>>8893888
A PDF that says "the earth is a closed system", with no argument or reasoning, is not proof.

>>8894097
It is from a university class about the earth. Care to try again Schlomo?

>>8890563
>The earth is a closed system. This was already resolved in this thread.
No, it was *claimed* in this thread. I don't think you know what "resolved" means.

>>8895051
Wrong captain brainlet! A set of lecture slides were linked to earlier.

>>8888413
These slides use 'closed' in the the sense that no physical matter enters or leaves the planet. This is not the same definition used by the second law (which also deals with energy and volume).

If you can't read further than the title you should fuck off m80.