Veritas: Anti-evolution 'arguments' abusing probability

https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/anti-evolution-arguments-abusing.html

The meme is an example of a typically awful 'argument' which touches, however erroneously, on molecular biology.

Of course there's no chance if your model, the process you are assuming, is merely imagining amino acid molecules randomly bumping into one another. When you get a number like this, we can all instantly recognise that the model - the assumed process and scenario, is hopelessly wrong. We don't even have to ask to see details of the 'model' nor the mathematical working, (which is never shown), to know that a gross error has been made. Apart from the absence of a model, no mention is made of how many trials are being considered, nor at what frequency. A result like that allows us to conclude that somebody has got it all badly wrong.

The other thing that constantly needs to be pointed out to the evo-phobes is that evolution is not about the creation of life, but instead, it is about how and why life -er- evolves once it is created. They never seem to learn.

Even if the writer of Genesis is wrong, when he wrote that the earth and the waters brought forth life, and if, instead, life was poofed into existence by an unnatural magic man using his ju-ju, it would make not one jot of difference to evolution, which only starts when you have life, however it came about.

If you think that God was capable of creating a world that could bring forth life, then you are neither an atheist nor an anti-theist.

Here's a great book by the professor of mathematics, Jason Rosenhouse, The Failures of Mathematical Anti-Evolutionism. https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/on-failures-of-mathematical-anti.html
From the book, https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/here-be-dragons-searching-large-phase.html

Here's a routine I wrote to show that a common beginners schoolboy/schoolgirl basic misapplication of probability can lead to error. Probability is often counter-intuitive. https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/probability-emo.html

2 comments:

Anonymous1 May 2024 at 10:41
I tell them to take a coin and flip it 28 times. Would it be possible to come up heads 28 times in a row? If everyone in the country flipped a coin 28 times, chances are someone will get all heads. The odds of getting heads 28 times in a row are 268,435,455 to 1. If 330 million people try it, chances are that someone will.
johannes2 May 2024 at 03:30
but it didn't randomly form at once.

Throw 28 coins. Select those who turn up head. Continue with the rest. Statisticly you would have 28/14/7/4/2/1. So after 7 trials you have 28 heads ;)