You wrote:
And: Please show us where miscible/immiscible liquids are mentioned in the 2nd law.
One of the problems with discussions such as the present one is that the parties do not take the trouble to provide a clear and unambiguous statement of what they mean by the "Second Law."
Reply:
You are very right. The ID/Creationists want us to think that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics 'proves' evolution impossible. It is a very curious position. The creationists object to 'materialistic' science as undermining morality, and yet they use the same materialistic science of the 2nd law to try to 'make a point'.
There are many statements of the 2nd law. One is, "heat does not spontaneously move from a cold region to a warmer region." Put in these words, it is hardly controversial, and would seem to have zero meaning for evolution. The order/disorder confusion excites creationists, because they seek a god-driven order. Which ignores the very quasi-randomness that gives rise to every one of us individuals.
More 'tomcat' reaction.
You obviously don't understand the applications of the 2nd law. Your work obviously doesn't depend directly on the dependability of signal processing. I wish I was afforded the same luxury. To anyone who uses the electromagnetic spectrum to communicate data, thermal entropy is an every-day, real world issue. It destroys information. Enough energy can effectively destroy all information in a given stream. Keep on bleating the 'talking points' that you read in your evolution church program; just don't expect to garner any respect from real people.