You're an amateur, sir. And it shows. And by the way, except in short doses, it's bad form to use someone else's words to talk for you in a discussion forum.
I am not a scientist, if that's what you mean by "amateur". But upir argument about the first law of thermodynamics is ludicrous, and not even ID proponants use it as an argument.
There *are* exceptions.
One is a quote from authority, e.g. quoting Einstein's "God does not play dice". This is not a logically valid form of argumentation, but it does show up in dorm-room bull sessions and the like.
Another is for humor, or because the quote says your point much more elegantly than you yourself could.
Another is technical material, so you don't have to derive the fundamental theorem of integral calculus from first principles.
And it is an example of this third case I think LGN was attempting.
But it is best to do this only when you have not just "memorized" the material in question, but "digested" or "assimilated" it: so you know *whether*, *why*, and *to what extent* the quotation is appropriate to the point under contention.
And I agree, that in this case, LGN in conflating first and second law, seems to have fallen short.
Full Disclosure: I have seen many Christians attempt to engage in argument, and when losing the argument, begin a fusillade of seemingly random scripture quotations. The misattribution of common scientifice errors to one's opponent seems like a similar attribute of the pro-materialistic evo adherent.
Cheers!