Posted 1 day ago


I’m getting a little sick of political correctness. I wanted to head up an Indian culture event in my residence hall, but my adviser was a little nervous because it might be “cultural appropriation”.

She had zero idea that I am half-Indian and have actually lived with my family in India for dozens of summers. But because I have light brown hair and fair skin, she decided that I couldn’t have any connection to India. She apologized, but I think that her comment was more racist than it was “progressive”. She focused on the color of my skin and not what’s inside to make sure that no one was offended. Well, I was offended.

Posted 1 day ago
Please explain to me what Anita did
Anonymous asked








You… you can’t be serious. This horse has been beaten so fucking long I don’t even think it any longer qualifies as dead anymore. It’s just fuckers going around smacking bottles of Elmers glue and bowls of kibble and bits with sticks. Do I really feel like dusting off the ol’ beaten stick to do this shit again? 



Luckily for you I hate her that fucking much. 

Lets see, 

1- Raised over 20 fucking times as much money as she asked for with her kickstarter. Gave nothing back. To make videos about video games, something fucking thousands upon thousands of people do for free. Getting 160,000 dollars when she only asked for 6,000. And continues to receive more donations. And made what, like 5 vids in two years? When those who do it for free do more thorough research, have better quality videos, and make a shit ton more vids.

2- Completely lied about being a fan of video games to get people to back her. In fact she is so fucking ignorant towards the medium she doesn’t know any genres exist outside of shooters. Not to mention no fucking experience in the field whatsoever. 

3- Was found to not even purchase some of the games she was criticizing. (the very thing she was asking money for.) Posting pics of just her with games, often times in the fucking store. Where you could just pick one up, snap a pic and put it back. As opposed to, oh I dunno, Some fucking receipts. 

4- Stole artwork and footage from other people. X

5- Has been found to make threats to herself at the same time as asking for more donations (despite getting more than 20 fucking times as much as she originally said would be necessary, and not even using the money for what she claimed to be.)

6- Disables all comments, and ratings, and fucking everything else on her videos. She makes a career out of criticism, but forbids people to do the same to her. 

7- Cherry picks like its her fucking job. Which since idiots keep giving her free money to do it, I guess it literally is her job. Like with her review of Hitman, where she claimed the game was misogynistic because it allowed the player to kill women and drag their corpses around. When you can do the same fucking thing to every male character in there as well, plus strip the clothes from the male and only the male characters. And criticizing a game for using a “damsel in distress trope”, when the final boss was fucking defeated by the female character herself. Or her criticism of fallout because the game gives you a popup for killing a woman when you have high karma. Or their depiction of female sex workers. When the game does literally the exact same fucking thing for males in both regards. She tried to claim a mission in watch dogs about taking down a fucking sex trafficking ring somehow supports them. She has claimed games that penalize you for attacking random women are somehow encouraging players to do so. 

So what did she do? She tricked people into giving her a shit ton of money, to partake in a hobby she doesn’t even like by her own admission, doesn’t even play half the shit she’s criticizing, cut corners in production including fucking theft, all to tell the people who do like this hobby that they’re bigots, while refusing to address criticism herself, ignores 95% of whats in a game so she can take out of context examples and paint it as misogyny, and then points to people giving her shit for all that she’s down to harm the gaming community and scam people out of money as justification. And you fucking morons keep supporting her. 

She’s a fucking scam artist, playing off people insecurities towards gamings influence on immoral behavior. Which has been disproved time and time again. And just some common fucking sense would tell you that if this shit were true, with the number of people playing AAA games there would be a obvious increase in certain actions every time a game was released. Which is fucking hilarious since many of these people fucking loathedthe republican party when they tried to claim video games encourage violence and terrorism. But suddenly a feminist says the same fucking load of bullshit, and these idiots are fucking dislocating their jaws so they can swallow it faster. 

While i agree anita does more harm than good (specifically to females wanting to get in to the industry) i think your whole post’s tone isn’t going to make anyone sympathetic to your cause.

I reblogged this to ask about the “caught faking death threats” thing. I don’t really get how that’s evidence of her faking them

I’m not looking for sympathy. Anyone who still supports Anita is going to continue to support her regardless of what I say. The facts are out, they’ve already made their decision, I’m just getting my kicks in before this whole shit show goes up in flames. 

And did you even fucking read it? 


There is no plausible way those were genuine. 

yeah i did, but there were a ton of tweets before the 12s ago one.

also i think you misinterpreted what i meant. im not saying youre looking for sympathy, im saying this tone of post will only win over those who already agree with you, not anyone on the fence or ignorant. And the “other side” are using this kind of stuff as fodder for their cause too


This screen-cap was take 12 seconds after the last of three minutes of tweeting, by a user who was not logged in. There is nothing in the search bar, clearly showing no search was done. Whoever took this had to know this user was making threatening tweets, and enter the exact url of their account at within three minutes of the users first post……or make the tweets themselves and then log out and take a screen-cap.

And it gets worse.


That dudes account? Made just prior to sending those messages. Stock photo, no personal information but their actual name for some reason, because that makes fucking sense when you create an account for sending death threats, just make shit easier for the cops. 

She couldn’t even fucking resist the urge to compliment herself in her own fabricated story. 


This dude is simultaneously telling her how great and sexy she is, while wanting to kill her. All with perfect grammar and punctuation, all falling in just shy of the 140 character limit, written merely seconds apart. What fucking angry gamer do you know that sounds like that? This shit is scripted. 


That’s a fucking twilight fantasy. Not the rantings of some 4chan troll.

And all this happening in the wake of the Zeo Quinn fiasco? How are there not 5 million red flags being raised about this to you? 

Especially considering she did the 1st fucking thing you’re not supposed to do when receiving this shit, make it public. Now her would be “stalker” is aware people might be coming for him, putting them into a its now or never situation. So she clearly didn’t contact the authorities, but she damn sure contacted the press. Shit’s everywhere online. She didn’t contact authorities because she didn’t want protecting, because she knew she didn’t need it. She just wanted it publicized. 

And yes, I was aware of what you meant. I don’t care about getting people to side against her any longer, because those who support her have had to ignore a plethora of evidence against her up to this point. They are completely unwilling to recant their position no matter what case is made, there is literally nothing supporting her. She’s fucked up at every turn. The only people that believed her, even in the very beginning are people who just heard feminist + video games and throw some money at her and called it a day. There is no reasoning with that kind of bias. So if they want to be stubborn pricks, well I’l be a dick too. I can’t change the mind of a cultist, but I damn sure can shame them into shutting the fuck up about their bullshit ideals. 

Yeah again, i read the reasoning for the tweets being fake and i can see how the reasoning works but i dont see how its irrefutable evidence at all. it’s totally possible that within 3 minutes she screencapped some nasty tweets. its suspicious but there are other concievable explanations

And you only really paid attention to half of what i said at the end there. It’s not really about converting opponents (though it could be) but also representing the argument well to fence-sitters or even just to avoid creating new enemies

No, within 3 minutes she saw them, WITHOUT SEARCHING some fucking how. Then logged out for some fucking reason. That literally makes no sense. What does make sense is she wrote them herself, logged out so it wouldn’t be seen she was actually in his profile, toke the shot and that was it. That would explain all those things. 

Well you know its funny, because I had a few fence sitters message me, all positive. There is no viable reason to treat a scam artist or her supporters with respect. They’ve done nothing respect worthy. They’ve done plenty shame worthy though, and now they reap what they sow.

If people are getting butthurt for being made fun of, because they decided to back someone who’s a thief and a scam artist without doing two shreds of research them self, they are in for a long miserable life. They fucked up, and I’m not going to coddle them for it. People need to learn that its not acceptable to pick sides without doing your homework. 

Posted 2 days ago
Feminist would care if a man got raped by woman because rape is wrong if a man does it or a woman does it
Anonymous asked

Funny how they seem so determined to make rape a gendered issue then. How the feminist in India opposed a gender neutral rape definition.

Link 1

Or how about the fact that feminist are incredibly silent about the current rape definition. They flat out ignore the current definition of rape that makes it so women cannot be treated as rapist?

Or how about all their gendered anti-rape campaigns such as men can stop rape? Or one of my all time favorite examples

David Futrelle Post

Or how about my own personal experiences with feminist when I pointed out I was raped by women. Not once but twice in my life. Did those feminist one of which was my own mother care, and where there for me? No my mother spat in my face, called me a liar despite the fact my ass was bleeding from the dry dildo harshly shoved up my ass at 12 years old, and told me even if it was possible for men to be raped then I would have a better understanding of how women feel, and then locked me into my room without dinner. Or how about my feminist “friends” from college when I was raped by a woman at 20? Where they there for me? Did they care? No they said I was lying for attention, and then they shunned me after they laughed in my face.

While I agree that rape is wrong no matter who the rapist is or what their gender is feminist sure do love to try and erase us male victims of female rapist and female victims of female rapist for that matter.The fact that you felt the need to send this anonymously is actually quite telling because odds are you know that the feminist movement does the exact opposite of what you claim. That being said thank you for taking the time to send this ask.

And before you try to throw skewed & biased facts at me here. My rebuttals.

"99% of rapists are men!"

Predictors of Sexual Coercion Against Women and Men: A Multilevel, Multinational Study of University Students (Summary of Study Results here)

40+ Empirical Studies that demonstrate that it is not rare or uncommon for women to use sexual coercive behavior towards men through sexual assaults, sexual intimidation, and sexual violence (i.e. rape)

40% of Rapists are Women (Keep in mind that the study itself is debunked, and uses bad methodology. Use this sparingly, if at all)

My own post where I use the above study and BoJ statistics to determine the gender composition of rapists and rape victims (Use sparingly, if at all.)

"1 in 4 women will be raped in her lifetime!"

My own post debunking it.

Article titled “One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Seven”

"1 in 5 women will be raped in her lifetime!"

Christina Hoff Sommers explains the bad methodology and “research” conduct that went into the CDC study which found this statistic (the same CDC study from the “40% of Rapists are Women” link)

"97% of Rapists Never Spend a day in prison!"

"Only .6%/1% of rape accusations are false!"

"Only 2-8% of rape accusations are false! That’s not that much!"

This post debunks all three of these lies.

"Rape jokes cause rape!"

A post debunking the study.

Schrodinger’s Rapist or “Women have to be afraid of men, because any man could be a rapist!”

A post debunking the idea.

"Teach men not to rape!"

Article titled “Want to Teach Your Son Not to Rape? Protect HIM from Rape and Sexual Violence!” (Includes links at the end of the article.)

Feminist Hate Speech Post!

I could on but I think I have made my point. WIth all that being said thank you for taking the time to send this ask.

Posted 2 days ago
When asked how an innocent person is to prove he or she indeed received consent, Lowenthal said, “Your guess is as good as mine. I think it’s a legal issue. Like any legal issue, that goes to court.”
If the person who wrote the fucking bill, when asked how it’s even possible to defend yourself against rape accusations defined in the Bill you wrote actually says “Your Guess is as Good as Mine” you might be dealing with a feminist. (via mr-cappadocia)
Posted 2 days ago


Can’t keep meowt. [video]

Is…is that a container full of WATER they put in front of the door?  They had to put in a motherfucking moat to keep this cat out and it STILL DIDN’T WORK?!  This cat is hardcore.

Yeah this shit never works. If a cat wants to get somewhere they will find a way.



Can’t keep meowt. [video]

Is…is that a container full of WATER they put in front of the door?  They had to put in a motherfucking moat to keep this cat out and it STILL DIDN’T WORK?!  This cat is hardcore.

Yeah this shit never works. If a cat wants to get somewhere they will find a way.


Posted 2 days ago


"The most annoying and widespread response has been along the lines of, “Hey, instead of making women wear this nail varnish, how about you just DON’T RAPE THEM,” as though, if these armchair activists had the power they deserve, there would be study-groups of rapists across the world being lectured and read blog posts from Jezebel, their palms glued to their foreheads in disbelief, wondering how they could ever have been so gross and inconsiderate.

I don’t mean to devalue the work of those anti-rape activists, obviously, but when somebody’s response to the news of a product that might help ensure the safety of a vulnerable person is: “WELL HOW ABOUT YOU ASK THE RAPIST TO WEAR THE ANTI-RAPE NAIL VARNISH” it’s hard not to wince. Yes, of course in an ideal world the rapist would be apprehended before he even became a rapist and nobody would rape anybody ever. But unfortunately we don’t live in an ideal world. Not yet.

Arguing in absurdly simplistic moral absolutisms makes you sound like a five-year-old struggling to grasp the concept of crime. Equipping people with the tools to better look after themselves is not the same as victim-blaming or advising them to take “preventative measures.” What’s sad is that these and other safety measures—rape whistles or mace, for example—are largely only marketed towards females. Maybe if more people started talking honestly about how men are also at risk from both physical and sexual violence, it would feel a lot less like women were being blamed for simply being women.

Finally, it’s important to remember that this nail varnish does not claim to prevent rape but simply detect the presence of a drug. And you know what? That’s pretty useful. A study of American college students put the rate of attacks carried out on people who have had their drink spiked at around 5 percent.

Read More

What do you guys think?

Posted 2 days ago

Epicurus - Question of Evil

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? 
Then he is not omnipotent. 

Is he able, but not willing? 
Then he is malevolent. 

Is he both able and willing? 
Then whence cometh evil? 

Is he neither able nor willing? 
Then why call him God?

Posted 2 days ago

An Atheist Reads The Reason for God - YouTube

Posted 2 days ago

Does the second law of Thermodynamics disprove evolution?

This something Theist like to throw about regularly and sadly even when you explain it to them or ask what are the other laws of thermodynamic’s they usually say I don’t know or say that is not the point what about the second law? This argument has and still to this day gives atheist headaches & so today I am gonna make post about this for anyone who gets asked this questions but first lets introduce the 4 laws.

The 4 Laws of Thermodynamics:

There are 4 laws to thermodynamics, and they are some of the most important laws in all of physics. The laws are as follows

  • Zeroth law of thermodynamics – If two thermodynamic systems are each in thermal equilibrium with a third, then they are in thermal equilibrium with each other.
  • First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can only change forms. In any process, the total energy of the universe remains the same. For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.
  • Second law of thermodynamics – The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.
  • Third law of thermodynamics – As temperature approaches absolute zero, the entropy of a system approaches a constant minimum.

Before I go over these laws in more detail, it will be easier if I first introduce Entropy.

Entropy and Phase Space:

Entropy is a very important thing in the realm of thermodynamics. It’s the core idea behind the second and third laws and shows up all over the place. Essentially entropy is the measure of disorder and randomness in a system. Here are 2 examples

  • Let’s say you have a container of gas molecules. If all the molecules are in one corner then this would be a low entropy state (highly organised). As the particle move out and fill up the rest of the container then the entropy (disorder) increases.
  • If you have a ball flying through the air then it will start off with its energy organised i.e. the kinetic energy of motion. As it moves through the air however, some of the kinetic energy is distributed to the air particles so the total entropy of system has increased (the total energy is conserved however, due to the first law)

To get a more detailed picture of entropy we need to look at the concept of Phase Space. Some of the concepts for this may be a bit confusing but bear with me, once you’ve got your head round it it’s not that bad.

A phase space is just like a graph, but a point on this graph represents the whole state of a system. Let’s use an example. Imagine I have a box with 4 gas particles inside. Each point in the phase space for this system tells you where all 4 balls are located in the box.

In our example we are only interested in the positions of the 4 particles, so each point in phase space must contain an x, y, and z co-ordinate for each particle so our phase space is 3N dimensional, where N is the number of particles in the system. So in our case, the phase space is 12 dimensional, in order that each point can describe the location of 4 bodies.

In all the diagrams I will depict the phase space as 2D to make it easier to convey what it actually represents. For our purposes we will not need to consider the dimensions.

If we imagine that each of the particles is a different colour so we can keep track of their positions easier. If we imagine the case where all of the particles are located in one corner of the container then we have the situation

In terms of the system, there are multiple other combinations of the 4 particles that will be as organised as the above state

and so on. Each of these set-ups will correspond to a different position in phase space as they are all different layouts of the system of the 4 particles. If we add these to the phase space along with the original we get something like

These 5 layouts of the 4 particles, along with the 11 other combinations, make up a set of states that are (apart from the colours) indistinguishable. So in the phase space we could put a box around the 16 states that defines all the states inside it as being macroscopically indistinguishable.

The total phase space of a system will have many regions all of different shapes and sizes and could look like the following

But how is all this abstract representation linked to entropy. Entropy, given in equations as the symbol S, is defined then as


Where k is Boltzmann constant (1.38\times10^{-23}JK^{-1}) and V is the volume of the box in phase space. All the points in a region of phase space have the same entropy, and the value of the entropy is related to the logarithm of the volume (originally Boltzmann never put the constant k in the formula as he wasn’t concerned with the units. The insertion of the k seemed to have come first from Planck).

Entropy can also be defined as the change when energy is transfered at a constant temperature

  \[\Delta S=\frac{Q}{T}\]

Where \Delta S is the change in entropy, Q is the energy or heat, and T is the constant temperature.

The Zeroth Law:

The Zeroth law is so named as it came after the other 3. Laws 1, 2, and 3 had been around for a while before the importance of this law had been fully understood. It turned out that this law was so important and fundamental that it had to go before the other 3, and instead of renaming the already well known 3 laws they called the new one the Zeroth law and stuck it at the front of the list.

But what does it actually mean? The law states

“If two thermodynamic systems are each in thermal equilibrium with a third, then they are in thermal equilibrium with each other.”

Basically, if A=B and C=B then A=C. This may seem so obvious that is doesn’t need stating but without this law we couldn’t define temperature and we couldn’t build thermometers.

The First Law:

The first law of thermodynamics basically states that energy is conserved; it can neither be created nor destroyed, just changed from one for to another,

“The total amount of energy in an isolated system is conserved.”

The energy in a system can be converted to heat or work or other things, but you always have the same total that you started with.

As an analogy, think of energy as indestructible blocks. If you have 30 blocks, then whatever you do to or with the blocks you will always have 30 of them at the end. You cant destroy them, only move them around or divide them up, but there will always be 30. Sometimes you may loose one or more, but they still have to be taken account of because Energy is Conserved.

Fundamental thermodynamic relation

From the second law we can write that the change in the internal energy, U, or a system is equal to heat supplied to the system, Q, minus any work done by the system, W,

 \begin{equation*} dU=\delta Q - \delta W \end{equation*}

From the definition of entropy above we can replace \delta Q, and we can also make the replacement \delta W=PdV giving us

\begin{equation*} dU=TdS - PdV \end{equation*}

Now if we have a system of particles that are different then we may get chemical reactions occuring, so we need to add one more term to take this into account

 \begin{equation*} dU=TdS - PdV +\sum_i\mu_idN_i \end{equation*}
The Second Law:

This is possibly the most famous (among scientists at least) and important laws of all science. It states;

“The entropy of the universe tends to a maximum.”

In other words Entropy either stays the same or gets bigger, the entropy of the universe can never go down.

The problem is, this is not always true. If you take our example of 4 atoms in a box then all of them being in one corner is a highly ordered system and so will have a low entropy, and then over time they’ll move around become more disordered and increasing the entropy. But there is nothing stopping them all randomly moving back to the corner. It’s incredible unlikely, but not actually impossible.

If you look at the problem in terms of phase space you can see that over time it’s more likely you’ll move into a bigger box, which means higher entropy, but there’s no actual barrier stopping you moving back into a smaller box.

The Third Law:

The third law provides an absolute reference point for measuring entropy, saying that

“As the temperature of a system approaches absolute zero (−273.15°C, 0 K), then the value of the entropy approaches a minimum.”

The value of the entropy is usually 0 at 0K, however there are some cases where there is still a small amount of residual entropy in the system.

The Basics:

When you heat something, depending on what it’s made of, it takes a different about of time to heat up. Assuming that power remains constant, this must mean that some materials require more energy to raise their temperature by 1K (1K is actually the same as 1°C, they just start at a different place. For more information click here) than others. If you think about it, this makes sense. A wooden spoon takes a lot longer to heat up than a metal one. We say that metal is a good thermal conductor and wood a poor thermal conductor. The energy required to raise 1kg of a substance by 1K is called it’s specific heat capacity. The formula we use to find how much energy is required to raise 1 kg of a substance by 1K is:

  \[Q=mc\Delta T\]

where Q = Energy, m = mass, c = specific heat capacity and \Delta T = change in temperature.

1a. Laura is cooking her breakfast before work on a Sunday morning (please send your sympathy messages that I had to work on a Sunday here). She doesn’t want to have to do any more washing up that is absolutely necessary, so decides to stir the spaghetti she is cooking with her fork, rather than have to wash a wooden spoon. She leaves the fork in the pan whilst she spreads her toast with margarine and grates some cheese. The stove provides 1000J of energy to the fork in the time she leaves it unattented. What would be the temperature increase in the fork, assuming half the energy provided will be lost to the surroundings and the initial temperature of the fork was 20°C, and the mass of the fork is 50g and is made of a material with a specific heat capacity of 460 Jkg-1K-1

Although I’m fairly sure I read somewhere that trying to work out energy changes in forks first thing in the morning was a symptom of insanity, it’s something I find myself doing from time to time. For this question, we’re going to need the equation Q=mcΔT this is an equation you’ll probably need a lot, so it’s worth trying to memorize it. It also springs up in chemistry too. First things first, we need to rearrange the equation to make ΔT the subject. Once you’ve rearranged this question you should get ΔT=Q/(mc). Substituting the values given to us in the question you get:

ΔT= 1000/(50 x 10-3 x 460)
ΔT= 43K
So since the initial temperature of the fork was 20°C, the final temperature of the fork would be 63°C.

Different Measures of Energy:

  • Internal Energy: U=\int TdS - PdV +\sum_i\mu_idN_i
  • Helmholtz free energy: F=U-TS
  • Enthalpy: H=U+PV
  • Gibbs Free Energy: G=U+PV-TS

Maxwell’s Relations:

\begin{equation*} \frac{\partial^2 U}{\partial S\partial V}=\left(\frac{\partial T}{\partial V}\right)_S = -\left(\frac{\partial P}{\partial S}\right)_V \end{equation*}

 \begin{equation*} \frac{\partial^2 F}{\partial T\partial V}=\left(\frac{\partial S}{\partial V}\right)_T = \left(\frac{\partial P}{\partial T}\right)_V \end{equation*}

 \begin{equation*} \frac{\partial^2 H}{\partial S\partial P}=-\left(\frac{\partial T}{\partial P}\right)_S = \left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial S}\right)_P \end{equation*}

\begin{equation*} \frac{\partial^2 G}{\partial T\partial P}=\left(\frac{\partial S}{\partial P}\right)_T = \left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial T}\right)_P \end{equation*}

Now that stuff is out of the way let us get back to the question at hand. Does the second law of Thermodynamics disprove evolution?

~In a Nutshell~

A common argument against biological evolution is that the theory contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. The second law says that disorder, or entropy, always increases or stays the same over time. How then can evolution produce more complex life forms over time? The answer is that the second law is only valid in closed systems with no external sources of energy. Since the Earth receives continual energy from the Sun, the second law does not apply.

~In Detail~


A common argument against evolution is that the theory contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics that claims disorder, or entropy, always increases or stays the same over time. This law has plenty of everyday examples. Buildings break down over time, and food spoils if not eaten soon enough. In both cases, the amount of disorder increases with time, but the opposite is never true. Buildings don’t strengthen themselves, and no amount of waiting will cause rotten food to become edible again. But because evolution results in an increase in the order and complexity of species — which is a decrease in entropy — some critics claim evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Defining the System:

However, this objection is grounded in a misunderstanding of the second law, which states any isolated system will increase its total entropy over time. An isolated system is defined as one without any outside energy input. Because the universe is an isolated system, the total disorder of the universe is always increasing.

With biological evolution however, the system being considered is not the universe, but the Earth. And the Earth is not an isolated system. This means that an increase in order can occur on Earth as long as there is an energy input — most notably the light of the sun. Therefore, energy input from the sun could give rise to the increase in order on Earth including complex molecules and organisms. At the same time, the sun becomes increasingly disordered as it emits energy to the Earth. Even though order may be increasing on Earth, the total order of the solar system and universe is still decreasing, and the second law is not violated.

Misapplication of The Second Law:

To claim that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics is also grounded in a misunderstanding of where the law applies. Nobody has ever figured out how to apply the second law to living creatures. There is no meaning to the entropy of a frog. The kinds of systems that can be analyzed with the second law are much simpler.
A living organism is not so much a unified whole as it is a collection of subsystems. In the development of life, for example, a major leap occurred when cells mutated in such a way that they clumped together so that multicellular life was possible. A simple mutation allowing one cell to stick to other cells enabled a larger and more complex life form. However, such a transformation does not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics any more than superglue violates the law when it sticks your fingers to the kitchen counter.

There are many examples of order arising from disorder in nature. Research conducted by Ilya Prigogine1 and others on systems far from equilibrium has shown that order can spontaneously arise in systems that are driven in the right way. It turns out that living systems are characterized as being far from equilibrium.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics also has interesting implications for cosmology, as it requires that universe began in a highly ordered state.

Well there you go. I hope that takes care of that and helps you out there. :) I apologize for the long confusing post but I hope it helps you in the future.

Posted 2 days ago