| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
02 Feb 2006 04:31:01 AM |
| Object: |
Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems every other day I read a letter by a couple of resident
atheists who seem determined to share their hopelessness with others.
This is written for the benefit of anyone out there who may be
somewhat persuaded by their arguments.
It is particularly annoying when they pose as some kind of superior
intellect and imply only weak minds could ever believe in the Gospel
of Jesus Christ. They ignore the fact believers in Christ include many
great men who probably could win an intellectual contest with them
with half their brains tied behind their backs. How arrogant to imply
the likes of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Martin Luther King
Jr. and C.S. Lewis just didn't have the mental ability to think it
through and consequently became believers in Christ.
They are correct when they state Christians must take much of what
they believe on faith, but so what? Many of our beliefs are based on
faith, whether we are Christian or not. Let's examine some of the
alternatives to a belief in God.
The scientific community has evidence the entire known universe began
with an explosion 11 billion to 15 billion years ago at a certain
place in space and has been expanding outward from there ever since.
They also have evidence the Earth is about 4 billion or 5 billion
years old as an individual planet. Darwin evolutionists believe all
life on Earth began with "simple" life forms and evolved into life as
we now know it during a couple of billion years.
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids. It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form. Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds? Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060202/OPINION0106/602020305/1007
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "TomS" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 09:51:47 AM |
|
|
"On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:31:01 -0500, in article
<1hn3u116phmbhkevubllhb3gdvo61qt0a9@4ax.com>, Jason Spaceman stated..."
From the article:
[...snip...]
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids. It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form. Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds? Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
This is sorely lacking as support for "intelligent design".
I will avoid some of the details that are just wrong, such as
the number of amino acids, which is about 20, not "at least
hundreds".
It begins by pointing out that humans have not been able to
form life from its constituent parts. Humans are the only
"intelligent desigers" where we have some knowledge of their
abilities, inabilities, materials, methods, or purposes. Therefore,
this is evidence that "intelligent design" is not a sufficient
explanation for the origin of life.
The question that should have immediately occurred to this
person was a comparison of the calculations of the odds. What is
the probability that an "intelligent designer" would have been
able to put together these amino acids? What do we know about
what this "designer" could do, or would want to do? This is
Before the amino acids were put together, did this "designer"
find something lacking in the world, something that had to be
set aright? Was the "designer" constrained to work with these
raw materials?
Were there *infinite* possibilities that were available to
this "designer"? And, if there were infinite possibilities, then
the odds are one out of infinity - infinity is a lot bigger than
10 to the nth power.
--
---Tom S. <http://talkreason.org/articles/chickegg.cfm>
"It is not too much to say that every indication of Design in the Kosmos is so
much evidence against the Omnipotence of the Designer. ... The evidences ... of
Natural Theology distinctly imply that the author of the Kosmos worked under
limitations..." John Stuart Mill, "Theism", Part II
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 11:38:13 AM |
|
|
In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Does anyone have a clue which amino acid he is referring to ? All are
pretty easy to "create" IIRC.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
03 Feb 2006 04:23:57 PM |
|
|
On 2 Feb 2006 09:38:13 -0800, "zawadzki@yahoo.com" <zawadzki@yahoo.com>
wrote in alt.atheism
In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Does anyone have a clue which amino acid he is referring to ? All are
pretty easy to "create" IIRC.
It's gotta be the 'Jesus tabs' the cretin's OD'd on.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 01:15:06 PM |
|
|
In article <1hn3u116phmbhkevubllhb3gdvo61qt0a9@4ax.com> writes:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
{...}
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids. It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form. Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident,
And while you're keeping that in mind, you might also want to
keep in mind that virtually all organisms use only twenty
amino acids, not "hundreds", and that all of these may
be easily synthesized.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 09:17:07 PM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<1hn3u116phmbhkevubllhb3gdvo61qt0a9@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented Jason Spaceman
broadcast on alt.atheism:
They are correct when they state Christians must take much of what
they believe on faith, but so what? Many of our beliefs are based on
faith, whether we are Christian or not. Let's examine some of the
alternatives to a belief in God.
Here come the lies.
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Lie.
It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form.
Really big whopping lie.
--
Rev. Lars Eighner, ULC http://www.larseighner.com/
The Mint Jelly of GodŽ -- The World's Best Atheist -- Unholier Than Thou
First Church of Electro-Baptism ***Atheist #1965*** One Short Circuit to Jesus
Shroud of Turin proven fraud! Next: Toilet Paper of Turin and Kleenex of Turin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 12:54:09 PM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman <notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> said:
From the article:
<...>
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Showing that when the conclusions satisfy us, we do not question the
math.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 09:03:34 PM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Snip ad hominem, poisoning the well, strawman, appeal to authority etc.
Snip most basic missunderstanding of Big Bang.
"It was an explosion at some point in space"
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Amino acids are pretty basic molecules - all can be synthesized quite
readily.
The Urey/miller experiments showed that many form spontaneously from
simple gases subjected to an electric discharge.
It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form.
The human body needs 22 to make every protien in our body.
Some organisms use a few less.
Me thinks Doofus says "amino acid" when the person he is stealing this
idea from means "protien".
Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds?
Impossible to say.
Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side.
How do they do that when they dont know what the steps were and what
their individual probabilities were?
They dont - so they just make ***** up.
The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
These numbers get bigger everytime I see em - and they are abut
complete modern protiens coming together spontaneously from individual
amino acids (or atoms or quarks - whichever gives the biggest number!)
by chance.
A complete strawman in other words.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Exactly.
Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
03 Feb 2006 12:29:39 AM |
|
|
Richo wrote:
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Snip ad hominem, poisoning the well, strawman, appeal to authority etc.
Snip most basic missunderstanding of Big Bang.
"It was an explosion at some point in space"
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Amino acids are pretty basic molecules - all can be synthesized quite
readily.
The Urey/miller experiments showed that many form spontaneously from
simple gases subjected to an electric discharge.
It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form.
The human body needs 22 to make every protien in our body.
Some organisms use a few less.
Me thinks Doofus says "amino acid" when the person he is stealing this
idea from means "protien".
Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds?
Impossible to say.
Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side.
How do they do that when they dont know what the steps were and what
their individual probabilities were?
They dont - so they just make ***** up.
The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
These numbers get bigger everytime I see em - and they are abut
complete modern protiens coming together spontaneously from individual
amino acids (or atoms or quarks - whichever gives the biggest number!)
by chance.
A complete strawman in other words.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Exactly.
Mark.
They are off. They assume that there is but one
series of bases that yeild a given protein,
but in fact large prtiens have a LOT of slop possible
in them. So instead of 1 chance in 1x10*70 you get more
like 1x10*10 in 1x10**70. And you may have a series of
families that work just as well. There may well be hundreds
of billions of ways to do something than one class of proteins.
For example, the toxin of fugu fish does not poison
that fish because that toxin is toxic only to a specific
nerve chemistry. Its neuro-chemistry is different from ours.
Ours is not the only way to do things.
Likewsie cone shells are toxic, they have yet another
neuro-chemical set of pathways. How many possible ways
to do this. Who can even tell? So its all bad numbers.
All the way around on numerous levels.
The argument only 'works' because few people have any
realization how bad it is is so many ways.
Eyes have been shown to have evolved at least 60
seperate times now. The DNA controlling that has a
huge range of possibilities.
Its not 1 chance in umpty billion.
Its untold numbers in umpty billion.
--
The first law of the false prophet has
always and ever been "Don't laugh!"
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
04 Feb 2006 06:18:56 AM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
Richo wrote:
<snipalot>
Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds?
Impossible to say.
Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side.
How do they do that when they dont know what the steps were and what
their individual probabilities were?
They dont - so they just make ***** up.
The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
<another snip>
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Exactly.
Mark.
They are off. They assume that there is but one
series of bases that yeild a given protein,
but in fact large prtiens have a LOT of slop possible
in them.
Exactly - the function of a protein depends on its 3-d form and the
particular chemistry of its "active site" - a very small subsequence
usually.
There are lots of ways of achieving very nearlly the same result - and
so many benign - (that is functional) variations possible.
For example, the toxin of fugu fish does not poison
that fish because that toxin is toxic only to a specific
nerve chemistry. Its neuro-chemistry is different from ours.
Ours is not the only way to do things.
Likewsie cone shells are toxic, they have yet another
neuro-chemical set of pathways. How many possible ways
to do this. Who can even tell? So its all bad numbers.
All the way around on numerous levels.
Good examples!
Mark.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 01:02:30 PM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems every other day I read a letter by a couple of resident
atheists who seem determined to share their hopelessness with others.
Strawman: Atheism is not a belief in hopelessness, nor is the outcome
of bein an atheist hopelessness. Quite the contrary it is the vastness
of a freedom never felt by believers.
They are correct when they state Christians must take much of what
they believe on faith, but so what? Many of our beliefs are based on
faith, whether we are Christian or not. Let's examine some of the
alternatives to a belief in God.
No, I keep my believes very tiny. For example, I do not 'believe' in
evolution, I accept that evolution is a workable model of how living
things change over time. I do, however, believe in the axioms that
underly the scientific method--because I have seen these methods work
time and time and time again.
The reason I don't believe in one or more of those god-thingies is the
vast lack of evidence for their actual existance; and then compounded
by the vast incongruities of the belief systems arising from believing
in one or more of thes god-thingies.
The scientific community has evidence the entire known universe began
with an explosion 11 billion to 15 billion years ago at a certain
Can we make that 13.7 +/- 0.3 BYA
place in space and has been expanding outward from there ever since.
They also have evidence the Earth is about 4 billion or 5 billion
Can we make that 4.55 +/- 0.15 BYA
years old as an individual planet. Darwin evolutionists believe all
Those who accept Darwins theory of evolution do not call themselves
elvolutionists.
life on Earth began with "simple" life forms and evolved into life as
we now know it during a couple of billion years.
And you have evidence to the contrary?
Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence.
A) life did not begin by an accident
B) there is no evidence that any intellegence was involved.
What are the
odds?
The odds are vastly higher for life to have sprung up without any
intellegence that for you to ever grasp that it did!
Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
Lets change that to Mathematicisons who deeply believe in creation have
come up.....
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Because you are incapable of checking the math. However, given that the
top 10 meters of the ocean was involved, and that rather week mixtures
of the amino acids were present, 10**79 trials can take place in less
than 10,000 years! So, in effect, there is not only PLENTY of time for
life to have sprung into existance, the bigger problem is "What took it
so LONG"!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JPG" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 05:15:16 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems every other day I read a letter by a couple of resident
atheists who seem determined to share their hopelessness with others.
This is written for the benefit of anyone out there who may be
somewhat persuaded by their arguments.
It is particularly annoying when they pose as some kind of superior
intellect and imply only weak minds could ever believe in the Gospel
of Jesus Christ. They ignore the fact believers in Christ include many
great men who probably could win an intellectual contest with them
with half their brains tied behind their backs. How arrogant to imply
the likes of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Martin Luther King
Jr. and C.S. Lewis just didn't have the mental ability to think it
through and consequently became believers in Christ.
They are correct when they state Christians must take much of what
they believe on faith, but so what? Many of our beliefs are based on
faith, whether we are Christian or not. Let's examine some of the
alternatives to a belief in God.
The scientific community
Science belongs to all makind surely, not just to the "scientific
community"
has evidence the entire known universe began
with an explosion 11 billion to 15 billion years ago at a certain
place in space
Oops! First ignorant statement.
and has been expanding outward from there ever since.
They also have evidence the Earth is about 4 billion or 5 billion
years old as an individual planet. Darwin evolutionists
Mmm "Darwin evolutionists" - what are they?
believe all
life on Earth began with "simple" life forms
and evolved into life as
we now know it during a couple of billion years.
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids. It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form. Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds? Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Very obviously you didn't.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060202/OPINION0106/602020305/1007
Well, here is the rest of it for what it's worth, unlike Jason I will
give a warning for those with high blood pressure to pop another
bendrofluazide.
__________
When Charles Darwin came up with his theory of evolution, the only
thing he could see in a living cell was the nucleus, cell wall and the
gel it contained. Now scientists have the equipment to know the cell is
like a factory with thousands of unique working parts, any one of which
causes the cell to die if it does not function properly. In other
words, there is no such thing as a "simple" life form.
Assuming the void beat the odds above, there would be another similar
number to represent the chances of an initial life form developing into
a life form as advanced as my grandchildren without any intelligent
design. Therefore, atheists must put their faith in impossible odds
upon impossible odds. And they try to ridicule us for blind faith. Go
figure.
So far, the true believers of Darwinism have covered up the flaws in
their fact-based theory and schools refuse to allow a discussion of the
belief that there is much to suggest life cannot reasonably be
explained without an intelligent designer I call God.
I don't know where Shreveport is but I hazard a guess that the summer
weather will be very hot and humid.
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jcon" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 08:50:00 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems every other day I read a letter by a couple of resident
atheists who seem determined to share their hopelessness with others.
This is written for the benefit of anyone out there who may be
somewhat persuaded by their arguments.
It is particularly annoying when they pose as some kind of superior
intellect and imply only weak minds could ever believe in the Gospel
of Jesus Christ. They ignore the fact believers in Christ include many
great men who probably could win an intellectual contest with them
with half their brains tied behind their backs. How arrogant to imply
the likes of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Martin Luther King
Jr. and C.S. Lewis just didn't have the mental ability to think it
through and consequently became believers in Christ.
They are correct when they state Christians must take much of what
they believe on faith, but so what? Many of our beliefs are based on
faith, whether we are Christian or not. Let's examine some of the
alternatives to a belief in God.
The scientific community has evidence the entire known universe began
with an explosion 11 billion to 15 billion years ago at a certain
place in space and has been expanding outward from there ever since.
They also have evidence the Earth is about 4 billion or 5 billion
years old as an individual planet. Darwin evolutionists believe all
life on Earth began with "simple" life forms and evolved into life as
we now know it during a couple of billion years.
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life. In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
How much success have they had making a man out of dust
or a woman out of a rib?
It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form. Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds? Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
No..no.. I'll let it go. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
Sometimes, they just make it too easy.
-jc
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "CreateThis" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 08:47:56 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
It is particularly annoying when they pose as some kind of superior
intellect and imply only weak minds could ever believe in the Gospel
of Jesus Christ.
There are plenty of intelligent religious-minded people, but none of
them are anti-evolutionists. Defining your faith in opposition to
demonstrated reality is what's stupid.
CT
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 07:20:44 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:31:01 -0500, Jason Spaceman
<notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
The scientific community has evidence the entire known universe began
with an explosion 11 billion to 15 billion years ago at a certain
place in space and has been expanding outward from there ever since.
They also have evidence the Earth is about 4 billion or 5 billion
years old as an individual planet. Darwin evolutionists believe all
life on Earth began with "simple" life forms and evolved into life as
we now know it during a couple of billion years.
Even though scientists are sure they know the components of a living
life form, they have been unsuccessful in combining them to create
life.
So far. But if I gave you all he basic materials, ie, iron ore,
bauxite, nickel, etc, and asked you to build a bicycle, but gave you
no indication of the tools, and only the vaguest indication of the
conditions, that you would need to accomplish that: How long would it
take you?
Give us time. Nature took half a billion years, and had the right
conditions. We have been trying for a mere fifty years, and can only
guess at the conditions that existed.
If we succeed inside 5,000 years, we will have done well.
That will be 1/100,000th part of the time that nature took, but I
suspect that it will be somewhat less than that.
In fact, one component is a certain type of amino acid, and
scientists have been unable to create even one of these particular
amino acids.
Which one is that? AFAIAA, we have made all of the amino acids known.
It is agreed by most scientists that at least hundreds of
different varieties of these acids are needed to sustain the most
primitive life form.
Bull Shite. There are just over one hundred amino acids.
All terrestrial life, uses a mere twenty of these.
Keep in mind atheists think life began by
accident, without any help from any kind of intelligence. What are the
odds? Mathematicians have come up with many different estimates giving
generous benefit of doubt at each step to the evolutionist's side. The
best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of mind-blowing
detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th power.
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Odds are irrelevant.
The calculation of "odds", for the natural appearance of life, depends
on a single series of experiments, and that it does not happen until
the last one.
It makes no allowance for billions upon billions of simultaneous
experiments.
In fact, every carbon atom that existed on earth, was "experimenting".
Also, there is another small factor, with this childish argument, that
the odds are against it.
The probability may well be 1 x 10^-79, but the *possibility*, is
unity: it could as well have happened on the first combination.
Farther, there are certain combinations that will happen any way.
Things like oxides, calcides, chlorides, nitrates, etc, and some of
these naturally form larger molecules.
We know that organic, and self replicating, molecules, occur
naturally, and are quite common.
We also know that life, is a series of such molecules.
You see, life may not be a spectacular, random chance event, but
simply a natural progression of chemical actions, and reactions, in
favourable conditions.
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 07:44:39 PM |
|
|
<snip>
The best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of
mind-blowing detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th
power. (Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
<snip>
I remember back in the old days when it was 10^50
What are the odds that it increased that much in just a few years?
But I'm all in favor of it being just chance. It would mean that it was NOT
MY FAULT I was so poor in chemistry. I just could not beat the odds.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 08:37:21 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:44:39 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
The best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of
mind-blowing detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th
power. (Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
<snip>
I remember back in the old days when it was 10^50
What are the odds that it increased that much in just a few years?
But I'm all in favor of it being just chance. It would mean that it was NOT
MY FAULT I was so poor in chemistry. I just could not beat the odds.
It's statistics, you know the bit, "99% of all statistics, are made
up". (:-)
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 10:30:08 PM |
|
|
Puck Greenman <sidhe@the.hollow.hills.fey> said:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:44:39 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
The best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of
mind-blowing detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th
power. (Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
<snip>
I remember back in the old days when it was 10^50
What are the odds that it increased that much in just a few years?
But I'm all in favor of it being just chance. It would mean that it was NOT
MY FAULT I was so poor in chemistry. I just could not beat the odds.
It's statistics, you know the bit, "99% of all statistics, are made
up". (:-)
That's plus or minus 3%.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
04 Feb 2006 07:30:28 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 04:30:08 GMT, Jim07D6 <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote:
Puck Greenman <sidhe@the.hollow.hills.fey> said:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:44:39 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
The best I saw in a few minutes "Googling" was 47 pages of
mind-blowing detail that calculated the odds at 1 in 10 to the 79th
power. (Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
<snip>
I remember back in the old days when it was 10^50
What are the odds that it increased that much in just a few years?
But I'm all in favor of it being just chance. It would mean that it was NOT
MY FAULT I was so poor in chemistry. I just could not beat the odds.
It's statistics, you know the bit, "99% of all statistics, are made
up". (:-)
That's plus or minus 3%.
--- Jim07D6
But of course. There has to be some margin for error, or
exaggeration.
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanitys little helper" |
|
| Title: Re: Columnist: Atheists put their faith in impossible odds |
02 Feb 2006 05:01:08 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:31:01 -0500, Jason Spaceman wrote:
(Admittedly, I did not check their math.)
Well he can STFU and FOAD, then.
How many times do we have to deal with the same repetitive, and thoroughly
repudiated shite? These people don't even understand what space is let
alone how natural selection works.
--
David Silverman FLAHN SMLAHN
AA #2208
AW HB #6
Free the paradise 3.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Re: Can anyone wrap their brain around this?
Their Science Does Not Even Get Close To Yours O Lord
OT: Christians are being hoisted by their own petard.
Christians take their manure indoors
Re: Today's Founder Quote: States have every right to honor God within their public places
The Code of the Skull and Bones: Do Americans know what their masters believe ?
OT: Kerry campaign backing off their Purple Heart story
Even Conservatives Think GOP Should Butt Out of Their Churches!
| OT: Palestinians want an end to their solitary confinement
Judge rules parents can only teach their children mainstream religion.
GOP Yellow Elephants Show Their True Color
think we all know who was responsible for that, the Godless liberals who cannot stand having their immorality shoved back in their ugly face!! The defenders of free thought, the Big Bang theory and evolution, are not only striking out at me, but at a
Re: The day that the States "confessed incompetence and surrendered their powers" to the Court
The redskinned Indians are naturally lazy and vicious, melancholic, cowardly, and in general a lying, shiftless, people. Their marriages are not a sacrament but a sacrilege. They are idolatrous, libidinous, and commit sodomy. Their chief desire is to
Christofascists end their "Abstinence" fraud
|
|
|
