It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by davesidious
No, you're making very little sense.
Well you've caught me on a day that my patience has some longevity.
So basically, take one hand full of corn, throw it up in the air.
If all the pieces of corn do not form an absolutely straight line with equal spaces throughout.
Keep grabbing handfuls of corn and tossing them until they do.
How many handfuls will he need?
[edit on 6-1-2010 by randyvs]
Any takers? Anybody care to tell me where the vast ocean of failed mutant creatures are? I also want to see the vast number of dogs that SHOULD exist that have some kind of partially developed evolutionary mechanisms developing in-progress.
Also, please show me a create that has a single eye, or three eyes. In a random world, it is totally unbelievable that eyes could develop over time, and the only number of them on any creature would be two, that happen to work in tandem to provide stereoscopic vision. That odds of that go beyond impossible, no matter how many gazillion years you have.
Give me a few hundred million years then we'll discuss the results. Where exactly did you hope to go with this one
author unknown
Let's say I want to open a safe that has a 10-digit combination. Opening this safe represents a SINGLE biological improvement. Now, I try every combination randomly, and every time I try a combination, I write it down and throw the paper on the ground. I keep trying a new combination and throwing the papers on the ground. Finally, as the law of averages would dictate, I open the door after about 5 billion tries (half of 10 billion). So what does the record show? An open safe (new single mechanism found by chance), and 5 billion fossils showing the failed attempts.
The fact is, when a mutation happens, it is nearly always harmful, and in the rest of the cases, it is harmless. But harmless is not the same as beneficial. Plus, mutations don't typically get passed down to subsequent generations, since it was a mistake in the first place.
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by john_bmth
Give me a few hundred million years then we'll discuss the results. Where exactly did you hope to go with this one
Absolutly nowhere. The point is, this being the challenge, you should not have thrown one handful of corn. It is absurd to expect it to ever fall
with in the guidelines.The randomness of the corn falling to earth will never be the perscribed constent.
How is this hard to folllow?
"Science can tell us so many things, this no one can deny. It most certainly
can not tell us what ought to be done".
author unknown
[edit on 6-1-2010 by randyvs]
Originally posted by downisreallyup
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by john_bmth
Give me a few hundred million years then we'll discuss the results. Where exactly did you hope to go with this one
Absolutly nowhere. The point is, this being the challenge, you should not have thrown one handful of corn. It is absurd to expect it to ever fall
with in the guidelines.The randomness of the corn falling to earth will never be the perscribed constent.
How is this hard to folllow?
"Science can tell us so many things, this no one can deny. It most certainly
can not tell us what ought to be done".
author unknown
[edit on 6-1-2010 by randyvs]
Yes, very good point. To add more to it, tf there are a billion possible configurations, then for every single throw the odds are precisely 1 out of a billion. It doesn't matter if you throw the corn for a quintillion years, the odds are still 1 out of a billion each time. That is what these bozos don't get. It doesn't matter how long you take, the odds do not change over time. Then, let's say you are trying to throw the same configuration two times in a row... the odds of throwing that is tremendously reduced. So the more complexity you have, the worse the odds.
Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by randyvs
Are you off your rocker? Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god. That's not unbelievable, that's the default position of every human being that has ever existed. You were an atheist before your parents told you about god.
Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by downisreallyup
Any takers? Anybody care to tell me where the vast ocean of failed mutant creatures are? I also want to see the vast number of dogs that SHOULD exist that have some kind of partially developed evolutionary mechanisms developing in-progress.
Here it is:
weirdnewsfiles.com...
And here is a partially developed eye:
Here is another one:
Yes, human eye is not perfect, so it is partially developed, as you call it...
[edit on 6-1-2010 by Maslo]
Originally posted by john_bmth
Originally posted by downisreallyup
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by john_bmth
Give me a few hundred million years then we'll discuss the results. Where exactly did you hope to go with this one
Absolutly nowhere. The point is, this being the challenge, you should not have thrown one handful of corn. It is absurd to expect it to ever fall
with in the guidelines.The randomness of the corn falling to earth will never be the perscribed constent.
How is this hard to folllow?
"Science can tell us so many things, this no one can deny. It most certainly
can not tell us what ought to be done".
author unknown
[edit on 6-1-2010 by randyvs]
Yes, very good point. To add more to it, tf there are a billion possible configurations, then for every single throw the odds are precisely 1 out of a billion. It doesn't matter if you throw the corn for a quintillion years, the odds are still 1 out of a billion each time. That is what these bozos don't get. It doesn't matter how long you take, the odds do not change over time. Then, let's say you are trying to throw the same configuration two times in a row... the odds of throwing that is tremendously reduced. So the more complexity you have, the worse the odds.
What? If you do this for long enough, the odds WILL come up.
2nd line.
Originally posted by downisreallyup
No, that is an error. There is no memory between throws. The odds it will come up the first throw is exactly the same odds it will come up after the trillionth throw. If the odds are infinitesimally small for the first throw, they will be infinitesimally small after the trillionth step.
This, what you just said, is the fallacy that many people make.
What? If you do this for long enough, the odds WILL come up.
reply to post by john_bmth
What? If you do this for long enough, the odds WILL come up.
Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by downisreallyup
Your statistical example is wrong, again, because simply does not work like that. It is NOT random permutation that needs to test all the possibilities.
Your example would test not only humans, but all the primates, cows, insects, plants, dinosaurs, aliens and every possible life form with less than 3 billion base pairs genome. That is not how evolution works.
This is how your example should be, again:
Human genome has 1 billion codons that are coding for 20 amino acids. Probability of having the first aminoacid/codon right is 1 in 20, or 0.05. After that, it becomes LOCKED IN by natural selection.
The probability of having the next codon right is 0.05, again. Thus, the probability of having both codons right is 1 in 40, or 0.025, NOT 1 in 400, because the first codon is already locked in (if it changes, the organism dies - natural selection).
The number of variations that needs to be tested to get human genome in this "evolutionary" model is 20 times 1 billion = 20 billion variants.
Thats far less than your example.
Originally posted by Maslo
Originally posted by downisreallyup
No, that is an error. There is no memory between throws. The odds it will come up the first throw is exactly the same odds it will come up after the trillionth throw. If the odds are infinitesimally small for the first throw, they will be infinitesimally small after the trillionth step.
This, what you just said, is the fallacy that many people make.
Yes they are - odds of mutation being beneficial, neutral or harmful do not remember previous attempts. But how is that relevant?
You are asking the wrong question. Your question: "What is the probability that ALL of the billion throws would fall in a row?" Of, course, very very small. The evolution-relevant question would be "What is the probability that AT LEAST ONE of the billion throws would fall in a row?" Remember, natural selection preserves good traits, so beneficial mutation has to happen only once - then it becomes written in the genome and passed down.
[edit on 6-1-2010 by Maslo]
Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by downisreallyup
So this boils down to you not understanding evolution or genetics.
You're making the argument of irreducible complexity. You should read that article, especially the part 'Argument from ignorance'.
Good luck! You're going to need it.
Originally posted by downisreallyup
I read your little referred article and found it unconvincing. I can see clearly where you may think these arguments presented against "irreducible complexity" are valid, but you still have not answered the main flaws I see in those arguments. First off, I could care less what any other court or scientist says, unless what they say makes logical and reasonable sense. If I can see how their reasoning is incomplete or flawed, then I will dismiss their arguments out of hand.
You still did not address the issue of WHERE ARE ALL THE FAILED ATTEMPTS? There should be a vast number of these, both in the fossil record and among the living animals today. But, please, just show me evidence of any multi-generational mutation sequence that adds a new mechanism, even a simple one. So, show me a creature that has a bone spur, whose child has a larger spur, or a spur that is disconnected as a precursor to a joint. Then show how a disconnected spur, which doesn't have a smooth ball-joint yet, would not be a serious source of pain for the creature.
Also, in that Wikipedia article, they mentioned things that were supposedly not reducible, and yet those are not the best examples. Instead, please explain how ATP Synthase came about... every organism has it, and it stores the energy needed by the organism. It is a complex mechanism that operates at the very core level of all creatures, whether single-cell or human beings.