Oh those clever evolutionists: Question-begging abiogenesis

RAZD got a POTM from NosyNed for this post, but I just have to comment on this hilarious statement he made: http://EvC Forum: Evolution in the VERY beginning -->EvC Forum: Evolution in the VERY beginningIs anybody but a creationist going to see why this is hilarious?This message has been edited by Faith, 10-02-2005 02:19 AMThis message has been edited by Faith, 10-06-2005 02:16 AM

Well it is always said that numbers never lie. I would argue that probabilities are more than empirical.

Would you, then, agree that the people of Brazil fabricated the first hurricane that ever hit their coast?NASA Earth Observatory - NewsroomSouth Atlantic tropical cyclone - WikipediaPage not found – Marshall Science Research and Projects DivisionPage not found – Climate Institutehttp://www.metoffice.com/sec2/sec2cyclone/catarina.html

quote:

---

Pick up any text book on hurricanes and it will tell you that the one place where hurricanes do not occur is the South Atlantic Ocean. The atmosphere does not provide enough spin near the surface to get them started and winds higher in the atmosphere tend to shear off any that do make a start. Hence, it was with some amazement that meteorologists watched the first ever recorded hurricane develop off the coast of Brazil in the last week of March.

---

Page not found | University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

quote:

---

No hurricanes had ever been reported in the South Atlantic. So Brazilian meteorologists didn't know what to make of the unusual storm packing hurricane-force winds as it swept toward their shores in March 2004. Warnings were issued in time to prevent all but one death, but hundreds of homes were destroyed.

---

Since at the time this storm completely contradicted ALL mathematical models of Atlantic storms, it must have been everyone's imagination that the storm existed at all.Is anybody but people who dedicate their lives to science see how hilarious YOU are for thinking that basing our models on math and empirical evidence rather than blind math is hilarious?This message has been edited by Jacen, 10-02-2005 03:36 AM

no, i think us evolutionists are getting a kick out this bit. because we've seen a lot of creationists trumpet mathematical models that proclaim the statistical improbability of evolution, despite the evidence that it has happened.

---

אָרַח

She means that it's similiar to her argument about the Flood. But, she's misread his initial statement and missed the word "evidence".

When making a mathematical model you have to choose your variables and you have to decide in what ways something can happen. After plugging the stuff in, and it gives you what seems to be a crazy answer, you have two options:1. Reality is crazier than you initially thought
2. You chose the wrong variables or missed a way that an event can be accomplished.The second is usually the case. The amount of people that think that the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 are incredibly unlikely to happen in a lottery is strangely high. People play and lose poker by choosing the wrong mathematical model for the probabilities involved.Conversly, Einstein famously made this same assumption. A genius - and when he saw a result that seemed to say that the universe was crazy, he assumed his model was in error...it turned out that the universe is crazy, but if Einstein believes that mathematical models are more likely to be the cause of the problem then I'm willing to side with Einstein on that one.

That's about as damning a statement for creationists as I ever saw.Mathematical models are only as good as the data one has in order to constuct the model. One might not be aware of everything that goes into a phenomena and thus your model fails.If your model predicts something can't happen, and you see it does happen, then the model is likely in error.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Faith, I fail to see the hilarity, if there is evidence that a mathematical model has been misapplied, then we need to look for a new one, right? Once you've stopped laughing, of course! Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

sorry Faith, I don't get it. Why is this hilarious ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

Yeah, this is pretty funny, alright. If a model says that something cannot happen, and there is evidence that it has happened, then it is absolutely certain that the model is erroneous.Understatement is often funny. Thanks for pointing it out, Faith.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

No. Only a creationist would be ignorant enough to think this was funny.

And yet...I am a creationist in the universal sense that God has a plan and an order behind or in spite of the chaos. I may actually side with Einstein as well...would be an interesting study.From a literalist perspective, take again the word "image". OK...mathematically, any given image is quantifiable. The symbolism of a number on the forehead, for example, is a quantifiable value. Philosophically, we could even assert human wisdom as a quantifiable value. The other "Marks" were that of a name on the forehead.Names: Do they have quantifiable values? Jesus= what value? Either value of Lord,monotheistic...or value of one of many "figures" of History. (Or..value of fictitious character.)
Theologically, Jesus as God has a value of either One (if you accept Him) or zero if you do not.Faith, you have faith in God as One....you're own personal One. It must appear, then, that you value collective human wisdom as a quantifiable value of finite worth...while you value Godly wisdom as Omnipotantly infinite. This is why you never change your mind.To the observer, you have a common sense value of either "fanatic nutcase", or zero OR you have a unique and infinite value of one of us..(us being believers)The Tree of Knowledge of good and evil is for all practical purposes the Tree of either/or. The Tree of 1 or 0. The Tree of Life initially had a value, from the human perspective, of infinity. (lest they live forever) Death is a finite reality.This message has been edited by Phat, 10-02-2005 07:42 AM

As others have indicated, RAZD was correct.The grandaddy of poorly chosen mathematical models is the one involved in Zeno's paradox. And even then, people understood that the problem had to be a misapplication of the mathematics.

Well, nobody got it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Cry I think. Maybe I'll let it go for the day and make the (no doubt futile) attempt to explain it later.Here's the statement again: Hint: CONTEXT.This message has been edited by Faith, 10-02-2005 09:45 AM

Should I give it a shot? I'm pretty sure I'll get it, but that'll ruin the "fun".