"Microevolution" vs. "macroevolution."

Nothing would.Say I come upon you laying on the floor bleeding from a hole in your leg. There's a gun on the floor in the doorway, and I dig around in your leg and extract a bullet.
Now, is it possible that you were shot? Let's test it.
I take the gun and shoot you in your other leg.
Result: Bloody hole with a bullet in your leg. So, we have the same outcome.
Does that prove that your first wound was caused by you being shot?
Nope. It could've been magically created by the Bloody Hole Fairy, with a follow-up call by the Bullet-in-Bloody-Hole Fairy.
You being shot may be the most reasonable explanation, but it's not the only one that'll work.

You seem to be suffering from a common misconception: That in order for something to happen once, it must be somewhat likely for it to happen twice. Such is not the case, and can be easily demonstrated.
Say I roll a 6-sided die 1000 times. The specific sequence of rolls I'll get is only one out of 1.41e+778 possible sequences.
Now let's try to replicate that sequence of rolls -- the sequence that it only took me 1 try to get: Take 1 billion people each rolling a die per second, 24 hours per day, 365.25 days a year, for 1 billion years. Such is only 3.16e+22 sequences of 1000 rolls. So, even after a billion years, it's extraordinarily unlikely that anybody would replicate my feat.
Does that mean that I can't have rolled the sequence that I rolled? That X cannot equal X? It's basic logic that such cannot be the case.This message has been edited by DominionSeraph, 04-08-2006 06:50 PM

No, what I've done is independent of your understanding.
If we modify it thus: "If I'm following what you said, you just proved to me that abiogenesis is impossible," well, that still ignores your part in the process. For it to be accurate, we'd need: "Using the sequence of concepts elicited by my reading your post, I just proved to myself that abiogenesis is impossible; thus, if my sequence of concepts is the same as yours, it can be said that you proved to me that abiogenesis is impossible."
We can drop the last bit, since it's just semantics. So we have: "Using the sequence of concepts elicited by my reading your post, I just proved to myself that abiogenesis is impossible;" which, coming from my model, "Faith," wouldn't be saying much.This message has been edited by DominionSeraph, 04-08-2006 07:37 PM