I have a meathead type observation. I've read that the probability of
forming a given 300 amino acid long protein randomly is (1/20)300 or 1
chance in 2.04 x 10^390. Now that is a huge number. What it doesn't
show is that this amino acid didn't form randomly.

'Cause the thing is...it did.

I've seen some things that defy probability if you look at it the right
way. Take for instance March 24, 2001; it's the seventh inning of a
training game for the Arizona Diamondbacks and the San Francisco
Giants. Randy Johnson hurls a 97 mph fastball that misses the catcher
and happens to destroy a pretty little dove that happened to be in the
wrong place at the wrong time. Now we can ask all kinds of questions
here, and the probability will change depending on the question. We
could ask (as the above question regarding the amino acid does), "What
is the probability that (that) (dove) was (flying) through (that
particular spot) at (the exact same time) as (Randy Johnson's) (Fast
ball) on (March 24, 2001)?"

The chances of THAT happening are near impossible. But it did happen.
I saw it.

The probability will increase if we change "THAT DOVE" to" A DOVE" and
even higher if we change it to "A BIRD" or change "RANDY JOHNSON" to
"A PITCHER" or "A BASEBALL PLAYER" and "FAST BALL" to "A PITCH".

Also /when/ the observation is being made makes a huge difference. If
the bird in question was in the stadium five minutes before his demise
and the question was asked you need only calculate the limited space
available to a bird that size over a five-minute period. However if you
calculate the probability when the bird is still in it's egg that this
is the fate meant for it then the number is almost meaningless.

While all of these numbers dance and astound we are left with the fact
that (that) (dove) was (flying) through (that particular spot) at (the
exact same time) as (Randy Johnson's) (Fast ball) on (March 24, 2001).
It seems impossible if you only look at it the right way.

If you take the bird-getting-hit-by-a-thrown-baseball phenomena and
expand your observation to include the entire history of baseball over
the entire planet, the probability starts to look more manageable.
It's still extremely unlikely, but not outrageously so.

By the way, Dave Winfield also killed a bird with a thrown baseball in
1983, so the above scenario is not only possible but it is also not
without precedent.

Ideas? Comments?

Ideas? Comments?