Thermodynamical Arguments Against Evolution
The argument that the second law of thermodynamics contradicts the theory of evolution has recently been revived by anti-evolutionists. In its basic form, the argument asserts that whereas evolution implies that there has been an increase in biological complexity over time, the second law, a fundamental principle of physics, shows this to be impossible. Scientists have responded primarily by noting that the second law does not rule out increases in complexity in open systems, and since the Earth receives energy from the Sun, it is an open system. This reply is correct as far as it goes, and it adequately rebuts the most crude versions of the second law argument. However, it is insufficient against more sophisticated versions, and it leaves many relevant aspects of thermodynamics unexplained. We shall consider the history of the argument, explain the nuances various anti-evolution writers have brought to it, and offer thorough explanations for why the argument is fallacious. We shall emphasize in particular that the second law is best viewed as a mathematical statement. Since anti-evolutionists never make use of the mathematical structure of thermodynamics, invocations of the second law never contribute anything substantive to their discourse.
KeywordsEntropy Change Irreversible Process Entropy Increase Scrap Metal Latent Order
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The author declare no conflicts of interest involved in the writing of the paper.
- Asimov, I. (1997). The army of the night. In I. Asimov (Ed.), The roving mind. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
- Betts, E. (1944). Evolution and entropy. Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, 76, 1–27.Google Scholar
- Bridgman, P. (1961). The nature of thermodynamics (second ed.). New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
- Brillouin, L. (1949). Life, thermodynamics, and cybernetics. American Scientist, 37(4), 554–568.Google Scholar
- Carroll, S. (2016). The big picture: on the origins of life, meaning, and the universe itself. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
- Clark, R. E. D. (1943). Evolution and entropy. Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, 75, 49–71.Google Scholar
- Coyne, J. (2009). Why evolution is true. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
- Dawkins, R. (2003). The information challenge. In R. Dawkins (Ed.), A devil’s chaplain: reflections on hope, lies, science, and love. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
- Dawkins, R. (2009). The greatest show on earth: the evidence for evolution. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Doolittle, R. (1983). Probability and the origin of life. In L. Godfrey (Ed.), Scientists confront creationism. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
- Eddington, A. (1929). The nature of the physical world. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
- Futuyma, D. (1983). Science on trial: the case for evolution. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
- Godfrey-Smith, P. (2007). Information in biology. In D. Hull & M. Ruse (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to the philosophy of biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Guye, C. E. (1925). Physico-chemical evolution. (Translated by J. R. Clarke). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
- Ho, M. (1997). The rainbow and the worm: the physics of organisms. Toh Tuck Link: World Scientific.Google Scholar
- Isaak, M. (2007). The counter-creationism handbook. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Kitcher, P. (1982). Abusing science: the case against creationism. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Kitcher, P. (2001). Battling the undead: how (and how not) to resist genetic determinism. In R. Singh, C. Krimbas, D. Paul, & J. Beatty (Eds.), Thinking about evolution: historical, philosophical and political perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Lane, N. (2015). The vital question: energy, evolution, and the origins of complex life. New York: W. W. Norton and Co..Google Scholar
- Lecomte du Noüy, P. (1947). Human destiny. New York: Longmans, Green and Co..Google Scholar
- Lemons, D. (2009). Mere thermodynamics. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Matzke, N. (2009). But isn’t it creationism?—the beginnings of “intelligent design” in the midst of the Arkansas and Louisiana litigation. In R. Pennock & M. Ruse (Eds.), But is it science? The philosophical question in the creation/evolution controversy. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
- Miller, K. (1999). Finding Darwin’s god: a scientist’s search for common ground between god and evolution. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- Morris, H. (1975). The troubled waters of evolution. San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers.Google Scholar
- Morris, H., & Parker, G. (1985). What is creation science? El Cajon: Master Books.Google Scholar
- Numbers, R. (2006). The creationists: from scientific creationism to intelligent design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Oerter, R. (2006). Does life on earth violate the second law of thermodynamics? http://www.physics.gmu.edu/~roerter/EvolutionEntropy.htm. Accessed December 2016.
- Pennock, R. (1999). Tower of babel: the evidence against the new creationism. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Pierce, J. (1980). An introduction to information theory: symbols, signals and noise. Mineola: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
- Provine, W. (1971). The origins of theoretical population genetics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Rosenhouse, J. (2002). Probability, information theory, and evolution. Evolution, 56(8), 1721–1722.Google Scholar
- Rosenhouse, J. (2011). Among the creationists: dispatches from the anti-evolutionist front line. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Sarkar, S. (2007). Doubting Darwin: creationist designs on evolution. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
- Sewell, G. (2012). How the scientific “consensus” on evolution is maintained. Evolution News and Views. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/04/how_the_scienti059011.html. Accessed December 2016.
- Sewell, G. (2013a). Entropy, evolution and open systems. In R. Marks II, M. Behe, W. Dembski, B. Gordon, & J. Sanford (Eds.), Biological information: new perspectives. Toh Tuck Link: World Scientific.Google Scholar
- Sewell, G. (2013b). Entropy and evolution. BIO-Complexity, 2013(3), 1–5.Google Scholar
- Sewell, G. (2017). On compensating entropy decreases. Physics Essays, 30(1), 70–74.Google Scholar
- Simpson, G. G. (1964). This view of life: the world of an evolutionist. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc..Google Scholar
- Styer, D. (2015). Remarks on Granville Sewell’s treatment of “Entropy and Evolution.” http://www.oberlin.edu/physics/dstyer/SandE/SewellErrors.pdf. Accessed December 2016.
- Theobald, D. (2012). 29+ evidences for macroevolution: The scientific case for common descent. Talk Origins. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc. Accessed December 2016.
- Van Ness, H. C. (1983). Understanding thermodynamics (tenth ed.). Mineola: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
- Whitcomb Jr., J., & Morris, H. (1961). The genesis flood: the biblical record and its scientific implications. Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.Google Scholar