J C wrote: » The odds aren't simply 'high' ... they are beyond the Universal Probability Bound and they are therefore impossibilities. The lottery is only won every week or so because on average the number of tickets sold every week or so are equivalent to the odds of winning. ... and if any lottery had odds against winning of 10^150 it would never ever be won ... irrespective of the number of tickets sold or draws made.
J C wrote: » You're correct that the odds for every sequence are equal ... and that's the problem ... the chance of getting a specific functional sequence is statistically 'swamped' by the overwhelming odds of getting a non-functional sequence.
SW wrote: » No, it just requires a new sequence not a specific sequence. That's how we get various species from common ancestors.
SW wrote: » No. Life can happen in any number of places but may not survive for long due to conditions on the planet. The universe isn't slowly managing things so that humans/animals/planets. Those life-forms thrive because they adapt to the environment.
Chunners wrote: » The Universal Probability Bound doesn't apply because it is a falsehood, it can only applied to one specific sequence at a time not every possible sequence, if you use it on all other possible sequences then you would see that they are impossibilities according to the UPB too
Chunners wrote: » The odds of winning the lotto are like 14 mil to one but people still win, by your logic no one should ever win, the amount of tickets sold is irrelevant, there could be only one ticket sold and that person would still have an equal chance of winning. The odds for anyone winning don't change if others buy less tickets
J C wrote: » That's one way that it is proposed for how life overcame the Universal Probability Bound ... by starting simple and becoming more complex ... but even just one simple specific biomolecule (and many hundreds are required for even the simplest cell) have combinatorial spaces in excess of the UPB.
Chunners wrote: » No it's not, are you saying that if I shuffled a deck of cards then the odds of me pulling out a 2 of hearts is lower than the odds of me pulling out a queen of diamonds? it's not, both cards have equal odds of being picked. See what you are doing is applying memory to a random function, it's like people who believe that that say coins have a memory and if I toss one 5 times and it comes up heads then next time it will come up tails because it remembers that the last 5 tosses were heads because it stands to reason doesn't it?
Ush1 wrote: » I think I know who JC is and I think he drinks in my local pub.
kingchess wrote: » And is it not the case that life started with very very simple life forms and became more complex over the billions of years that the planet existed??:eek:
J C wrote: » It requires a specific sequence for functionality ... any non-intelligently produced 'new' sequence is certain to be non-functional due to the non-functional combinatorial space being much greater than the UPB.
J C wrote: » It is similar to needing a specific sequence of 104 cards for a specific 'result' ... to get this specific sequence would be an impossibilty for non-intelligently directed processes as the combinatorial space at 10^135 is approaching the Universal Probability Bound of 10^150. However, somebody with two packs of cards can lay them out in a specific sequence in less than 10 minutes, using their intelligence. So something that is a statistical impossibility for non-intelligently directed processes using all of the matter and time in the Big Bang Universe ... can be done by a person of average intelligence in less than 10 minutes. It is observed that biomolecules with specific functionalities have specific amino acid sequences in a specific combination and any changes in these sequences produces non-functionality. ... I accept your contentions, if evolution is true, it wouldn't be working to create any particular result like Humans ... but then any process that doesn't work towards a particular result is unable to deliver any result and will result in destruction rather than construction. ... and all living organisms possess very purposeful biological systems. ... and any system producing and developing life (including spontaneous evolution) needs to produce specific functional biomolecules at specific times and places and in precise co-ordinated sequences for the viability of the organisms concerned ... and the combinatorial spaces of these specific sequences are so great that they are impossibilities for non-intelligently directed processes.
J C wrote: » The Universal Probability Bound only applies to non-intelligently directed systems ... it can be overcome in 10 minutes (as in your cards example) by the appliance of intelligence. The odds for anyone winning don't change if others buy less tickets ... but the odds of the lottery being won at all do change, depending on the number of tickets sold.
Osgoodisgood wrote: » If the sequence was different, life would be different because it would've adapted to different conditions. Or it wouldn't have survived or formed at all. The problem is you think you're special. You're not. At least not in the way your dusty old book of goat herding tales would have you believe.
Saganist wrote: » I've only read the last few pages and I can say that.You sir, are a troll.
Terrlock wrote: » The world is still full of people that worship and follow false gods.
J C wrote: » I'm not talking about me or Humans ... I'm talking about the simplest of life-forms. ... if the sequence was different it wouldn't work.
J C wrote: » ... and you sir ... are mistaken.
Wibbs wrote: » Look for me it boils down to this; the origin of life, the conversion of a "non living" chemical process to one we call "life" is a mystery waiting to be solved. There are all sorts of theories, but it's not quite nailed down as a process. Yet. However jumping to the wild conclusion that it was the "magic" of a very culturally localised and emotionally and physically limited bronze age "god" of tribes of sheep herders and subsistence farmers who picked up memes of larger surrounding civilisations and evolved their theology, is a very big leap indeed. A leap of faith? More a leap of received bloody nonsense. More, the only reason JC and his brethren have this meme down to today is purely an accident of history. If Rome had succeeded in feeding all Christians to the lions in the games, then today JC would be arguing for Zeus as the progenitor of the universe and humans and our place in reality. And it would be equally daft. And this is coming from someone who leaves open the possibility of an "external force"(or internal forces. Take the Gaia principle to universal levels type of thang), someone who thinks "dark" matter and energy and quantum inflation and the multiverse are an intellectual fudge because the maths and observation don't quite tie up with theory, with a sideorder of philosophical onanism and hubris. For me bad science, or half formed science can often take the place of daft religion in the hubristic and dogmatic minefield and mindfield that is the human psyche. It seems that hubris is another thing that marks humans out as unique and long may it continue. It's a big reason why we are what are today.However, "science", IE the evidence we thinking and abstract and reflective beings see and feel and measure is so far ahead of religious dogma to make it obsolete. The dogma and hubris of science changes over time and responds to observation and thought. Religious dogma doesn't or very rarely. For all its faults the Catholic church does and has responded and changed over time. The joke is because it was originally a classical faith and theology that brought in and bent the "barbarian" faith to its cultural will, it's more practical and indeed "scientific" and open to science and common opinion. Some Protestant faiths see this as a weakness, even signs of the "work of the devil". I find that ironic on sooo many levels.
looksee wrote: » I've kind of lost interest in this discussion since it went all boggly-maths. Much more interesting to discuss whether Noah managed to get dinosaurs onto the ark and if Adam had a belly button and how fossils happened.
Wibbs wrote: » For all its faults the Catholic church does and has responded and changed over time. The joke is because it was originally a classical faith and theology that brought in and bent the "barbarian" faith to its cultural will, it's more practical and indeed "scientific" and open to science and common opinion. Some Protestant faiths see this as a weakness, even signs of the "work of the devil". I find that ironic on sooo many levels.
Chunners wrote: » lol Wibbs the concept of Hell as fire and brimstone didn't even exist until there was a book wrote by a guy called Dante in the 14th century, the book was called "The Divine Comedy" and part of it was "Inferno" (better known as "Dante's Inferno" ) and it was a short story about his decent into Hell where he had to pass the gates of Hell and the gates said "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here" and inside were the 9 circles where various people were punished by demons shoving red hot pokers up their arse. The Catholic church jumped on this as a way to frighten their flock and thus the fear of burning in hell was born Can't post links yet but google Dante and inferno and you'll find it, it's very interesting reading to understand how all the lies came about and why they still exist today
Chunners wrote: » Yes it would, did I not just post about a life form that lives on arsenic?
Humans are not the only form of life, humans are only one of the many myriad of forms that evolution makes possible
SaveOurLyric wrote: » While it is easy to understant the ignorant and uneducated still following the myths of religion, is there a Darwinist explanation for the otherwise seemingly well informed and educated minority, still holding the religeous delusions ? Surely they arent all trolls ?
