quote:
I have not seen anything stated about this in the current thread so I thought I would make mention of it.
In short, mathematically speaking, it is impossible for life to come from non-life.
In short, mathmatically speaking, it is impossible for you to even exist. So how come you are?
quote:
Given the enormity of the 'age' of the universe, still one does not have enough time or probability for proteins to be developed on their own by chance, let alone DNA.
So fill it in with "Godidit" without any verifiable, tested or observed evidence?
quote:
It's one thing to look at the present circumstances and say, "Because we are, it must have happened." But it is a completely different ball of wax to say that it really did all by chance.
Who said it had to happen by chance alone? Why couldn't some events be selectively favored over others?
quote:
I am sure that DNAunion can attest to the intricacies of DNA, and the difficulties that arise when trying to consider this all just coming together at the right time and making life.
If asked, I have documentation showing statistical evidence that the chance of life from non-life is nil (10 to the power of 1.4 million).
I wish I could give credit to myself over the following analogy, but someone else posted it and I simply pasted it. So here's a counter analogy with a little modification of my own:
"Consider the probability of your own existence. Suppose the Earth is as young as many creationists say it is,
about 5000 years old. What then is the probability that you would have been born? Let's generously assume that
the average length of a generation over the last 5000 years has been 30 years. Let's also assume, very generously,
that the average probability of an individual living long enough to have children and then to actually have them
is 95%. The probability that all of your great-great-grandfathers and great-great-grandmothers survived and had
children leading to you (or to anyone) would then be about 1 in 25 million! Somehow we all won the lottery.
This example, is a good example of the posterior probability
fallacy. The probability of an event occurring, after it has already occurred, is exactly 100%. Just because
a given protein is configured in a certain way doesn't mean it couldn't have been just as successfully configured
in a bazillion other possible ways. Abiogenesis, by accumulating positive changes and eliminating
the negative ones, may have ensured life."
And this analogy is being very generous. If you accept an old earth (older than 5000 years or so), the stat. of 1 in 25 million goes through the roof. However, it is a logical fallacy to begin with.
™ Version 4.2
