Good day ATS-ers from OT! I trust you are enjoying the autumn (if your area is so fortunate to have one). It is beautiful where I am. Last month I
floated a bit of a controversial thread (nearly 800 replies) about statistical variability lending itself to a high probability of a creator God. It
wasn’t much of a deep thread per se’, meaning I didn’t use a bunch of statistics or other related facts…I sorta just floated the idea, to
kinda see the reaction…to learn of the holes, if any, in the premise, to gage others opinions and to further my thoughts and research on the matter.
I’ve had a little time since then to go back and review the skeptic’s points and consult a number of disciplines…that being more in-depth
statistics, atomic research, dark matter, astronomy, quality rules, more on variability, more on the central limit theorem, the empirical rule, normal
distribution, evolution, the Galton experiment, genetics….and yes, heaven forbid, the BIBLE…no spiritual pun intended:
And here are my 5 conclusions….
1) The God of the Bible created everything we see (and don’t see)
2) The earth is a unique place
3) Evil has blinded the minds of unbelievers
4) Science observed in a holistic/multi-disciplinary manner confirms #1 and #2. i.e. visual-spatial lenses.
5) This thread may make people angry with me, but they won’t forget it
Want to know how I got here? If the answer is yes, you can’t half-ass read this OP….you must get engaged…
---learn first WHAT I am saying, ---next SEE the linkages-this may take time, ---next OPEN yourself to the possibility you can learn a few
things…and maybe together we can get somewhere. With that said here goes….ready?
Here the OP’s outline:
1) Galton Experiment and ‘math’ independence
2) Central Limit Theorem
3) The Empirical Rule (68-95-99.7) within Normal Distribution
4) System Variability
5) Evolution’s Premise
6) Space Matter (ingredients)
7) Evolution’s Dilemma?
8) Pulling it together with some observations and questions from OT
9) Your turn…
First, ever heard of the Galton experiment? Go play the applet on the link below. It simulates Galton's Board, in which balls are dropped through
a triangular array of nails. This device is also called a quincunx. Every time a ball hits a nail it has a probability of 50 percent to fall to the
left of the nail and a probability of 50 percent to fall to the right of the nail. The piles of balls which accumulate in the slots beneath the
triangle will resemble a binomial distribution. To reach the bin at the far left the ball must fall to the left every time it hits a nail.
Because Galton's board consists of a series of experiments the piles in the slots are the sum of 10 random variables. Therefore, this simulation
provides also an illustration of the central-limit theorem, which states that the distribution of the sum of n random variables approaches the normal
distribution when n is large.
Try it: www.stattucino.com...
Second, ever heard of the “Central Limit Theorem?” - The means (X) of random samples taken from ANY distribution (mean μ and variance σ2) will
exhibit an approximately normal distribution (mean μ and variance σ2/n)
In less mathematical terms, it is any of a set of weak-convergence theories. They all express the fact that a sum of many independent random variables
will tend to be distributed according to one of a small set of stable distributions. The amazing and counter-intuitive thing about the central limit
theorem is that no matter what the shape of the original distribution, the sampling distribution of the mean approaches a normal distribution.
Furthermore, for most distributions, a normal distribution is approached very quickly as N increases. The CLT is considered the heart of probability
theory, although a better name would be normal convergence theorem.
The CLT is why we can predict the American President while surveying only 1100 people! Amazing isn’t it?
Question? If randomly distributed samples, “approximate” the make-up of the population, then does the observed “design” prove a
“designer”? Certainly is consistent to OT! But hold off just yet, keep going please…
The CLT is ingrained in truth; remember…“according to Platonism, the reality of mathematical objects is independent of our knowledge of them.
Math is not some abstract science, but an absolute reality of the universe. Every mathematical object is definite, with a definite purpose – some
known, many unknown. While some do not exist within the space of physical existence, they were neither created, nor will they disappear. Math is
simply “out there,” floating around, regardless of what we as a human race say about it. In short, according to the creed of Platonism,
mathematicians are empirical scientists [like a geologist] – they cannot invent anything, only discover things that are already there.”
Third, what about the Empirical Rule? Please go and watch this 2 minute video on the “Empirical rule”
Here’s the details, the 68-95-99.7 rule or empirical rule, states that for a normal distribution, nearly all values lie within 3 standard deviations
of the mean.
-About 68% of the values lie within 1 standard deviation of the mean (or between the mean minus 1 times the standard deviation, and the mean plus 1
times the standard deviation). Represented as: .
-About 95% of the values lie within 2 standard deviations of the mean (or between the mean minus 2 times the standard deviation, and the mean plus 2
times the standard deviation). Thus: .
-Nearly all (99.7%) of the values lie within 3 standard deviations of the mean (or between the mean minus 3 times the standard deviation and the mean
plus 3 times the standard deviation). And….. .
This data shape is called NORMAL DISTRIBUTION, please remember that ok?
Fourth, what about the 94/6 Rule? Ever heard of that? Quality guru W. Deming defines a system as "a network of interdependent components that work
together to accomplish the aim of the system. . . . An example of a system, well-optimized is a good orchestra" (1994, p. 50). Source/Book: Deming
, WE. Out of Crisis, 1986:314-316 MIT, Center for Advanced Engineering Study Cambridge, MA.
More here: surfstat.anu.edu.au... “Deming substituted the term special cause for assignable cause. Deming said
that uncovering special causes was the responsibility of the local work force (those who had day-to-day contact with the process). Common causes were
part of the system. The system is the responsibility of management. If the common cause variation is too large, it is the responsibility of management
to change the system. Deming, stated that 85% of the problems with processes were system problems; later he increased this to over 94%, based on his
And here: www.qualitydigest.com...
“Every system has variation; some of this is due to the system itself, known as common cause variation; some of it is due to singular incidents
or special situations; this is special cause variation. In his book, Out of the Crisis (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982), W. Edwards
Deming estimated that 94 percent of problems (or possibilities for improvement) lie with the system as common-cause variation; 6 percent are special
And lastly here: www.poppendieck.com... “W. Edwards Deming first popularized the theory of variation, which is now a
cornerstone of Six Sigma programs. Deming taught that there are two kinds of variation: common variation and special variation. Common variation is
inherent in the system, and special variation is something that can be discovered and corrected. Common variation can be measured and control charts
can be used to keep the system within the predicted tolerances. But it is not possible for even the most dedicated workers to reduce common
variation; the only way to reduce common variation is to change the system. And here’s the important point: Deming felt that most variation,
(95%+) is common variation, especially in systems where people are involved.
The other kind of variation is special variation, which is variation that can be attributed to a cause. Once the cause is determined, action can
be taken to remove it. But there is danger here: “tampering” is taking action to remove common variation based on the mistaken belief that it is
special variation. Deming insisted that tampering creates more problems that it fixes.
In summary: The overwhelming majority of variation is inherent in a system.”
“System,” huh? You mean like the universe? You mean like evolution? I thought they were one in the same, maybe not? “Inherent!” huh?…
Remember that, ok? Keep going….
Fifth, what is the Evolutionist’s Premise? Well, the Evolutionary Strategy Methods are defined, “as far as real-valued search spaces are
concerned, mutation is normally performed by adding a “normally distributed random value” to each vector component. The step size or mutation
strength (i.e. the standard deviation of the normal distribution) is often governed by self-adaptation (see evolution window). Individual step sizes
for each coordinate or correlations between coordinates are either governed by self-adaptation or by covariance matrix adaptation (CMA-ES).”
There’s that normal distribution again…hmm??
And here: thememorybank.co.uk...
“Statistical patterns can be found in nature and society. Their distribution may conform to mathematical models. Take a large sample of adult
human beings and measure their height. Most cases will fall between five and six feet with very few less than four or more than seven feet. Because
this is a continuous variable, the results can be plotted on a graph to which a curve may be fitted. It too will have a single peak with fan tails on
the high and low ends. We call this the “normal distribution” or popularly the ‘bell-curve’. For more than a century statistical inference has
largely been based on this curve with its parameters of mean and standard deviation.”
There it is again….And in nature, too? See: elsmar.com... “…. Normal Distributions are the most common type of
distribution found in nature….”
And renowned statistician Arnold King from ‘AP Lectures,’ says here: arnoldkling.com...
“… The normal distribution is mathematically complex but occurs frequently in nature…”
Normal distribution is important for 2 reasons.
1. Many variables that we observe are distributed normally. --Physical characteristics of plants and animals, such as height and weight, fit a normal
distribution quite well. Performance of stock prices tends to fit a normal distribution. Many types of prediction errors and measurement errors tend
to be distributed normally.
2. The central limit theorem.--It proves that a particular type of measurement error will be normally distributed. This type of measurement error is
called sampling error.”
Readers, are you beginning to see the connections? Let’s move to genetics, shall we? The Oxford English Dictionary defines evolution as ‘any net
change in the genetics of a population’
Dr Herbie says, at drherbie.wordpress.com... “To all intents and purposes we can take this as
‘any change to the normal distribution of a characteristic within a population’. That’s why evolution is all about the “normal
There it is again! And what about the folks at Haaar-vard?
Here: adsabs.harvard.edu... “The evolutionary rates of protein-coding genes in an organism span, approximately, 3
orders of magnitude and show a universal, approximately log-“normal distribution” in a broad variety of species from prokaryotes to mammals. This
universal distribution implies a steady-state process.”
And to bring it home, see: www.genetics.org...
“CHARLESWORTH 1993B …. also investigated the conditions under which a modifier of recombination rates will spread through the population and
discussed the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination under such scenarios. These authors assumed a “normal distribution” of phenotypic
values that the genetic variance remains constant during evolution and that only the mean phenotype responds to selection.”
Straight from the horse’s mouth, huh?
Sixth, what can we learn about sample size? And the make-up of the space? Did you know the universe is made up of the same substances everywhere? At
its base there are only 6 high-level substances / ingredients / matter. Here’s the break down…heavy elements 0.03%, neutrinos 0.3%, stars 0.5%,
hydrogen and helium 4%, dark matter 30% and dark energy 65%. This percentage breakdown is typified in the smallest of elements known to man-atomic
make-up/energy. In reality, largeness and smallness are the same thing.
“Space matter is filled everywhere in the universe. All matter in the universe (in the ordinary world) is made of space matter. Since the
gravitational force is exerted on space matter, all massive bodies have a denser medium of space matter envelop. Bending of light when it passes
through near massive objects like stars, lensing effects in some regions in the galaxies are because of the refraction of light by the denser space
matter that present in these regions and are purely the demonstrations for the presence of space matter in the macro world. Increasing of mass of a
fast moving body, change in shape of a body resulting from its motion; the effect known as the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction etc are also the
evidences for the space matter in space. Also, electric field lines and magnetic field lines both are created by the alignment of space matter units.
All form of energies (except gravitational potential energy) are released because of the explosion, expansion or releasing of space matter. For
example, the releasing of energy in a nuclear reaction is due to the rapid-huge increasing of volume of ordinary matter to space matter. The missing
mass (mass defect) in a nuclear or chemical reaction is converted into space matter. Since the ordinary matter is an extremely compressed state of
space matter, when it released, they will explode violently and release energy.”
Physic.org short video explains it all, please view:
Missing matter? Wonder what (WHO) that is? Paul said, “Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all
things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created
by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” All things ‘hold’ together? Hmm?? Let him who has ears,
Seventh, what……therefore…….is Evolution’s Dilemma?
“Gregor Mendel studied mainly traits that have distinct alternate forms for instance, purple flower color vs white flower color. But many traits
are more complex than this and basically can take on any number of continuous values. For example in humans there is not just two classes of people -
short vs tall- but a whole range of possible heights. In addition many traits are not controlled by a single gene pair but by many genes interacting
with each other and also with the environment.. The study of traits controlled by many genes and also by the environment is called quantitative
genetics. This a complex area of genetics but some understanding of quantitative genetics is useful for evolution because evolution often acts on
complex traits influenced both by genetics and by the environment.
This presents a problem for evolution …. since for evolution to happen by natural selection requires the presence of
genetically based variation in the value of a quantitative trait. Yet if offspring tend toward the mean value of the trait for the two parents then,
the necessary variation for evolution to happen would be lost. The inheritance of quantitative traits is typically viewed in terms of what is called
Eighth…“Whew, that was a lot OT”
“I know, thanks for hanging in there.”
“Now what, OT?”
OK, here are a few initial observations/questions…
1) If normal distribution is the foundation of evolution as stated by the above proponents…and the central limit theorem fits in the entire
universe….meaning samples must fall within (approximate) the population…and the whole universe is made up of the same substances to nullify sample
size….then why aren’t EARTH-TYPE planets prevalent?
2) If system variability follows a predictable pattern….and evolution is a system…why isn’t transitional life more observable? Like 94% of the
3) Why do evolutionists hold to the role of normal distribution and deny the central limit theorem….meaning, if nature did it only once it … it is
not COMMON, and therefore must be assignable/special/God-breathed/Jesus-stuff? The math doesn’t add up, period, don’t you see this friend?
4) Doesn’t the biblical truth of Jesus’ ‘omni-present’ characteristic makes sense with him being the supposed “missing matter” Further …
What’s missing in Quantum Physics? Mathematically, why doesn’t it all break apart? The more we learn about subatomic particles called
‘gluons’, the more the universe seems to be made of nothing at all? Scientist says that all the electrons and subatomic particles of an atom are
held together in their precise position and orbit by an invisible force, by which without it, everything would fall apart and reality as we know it,
would cease to exist in an instant.
Quotes from Discovery Magazine in 2000, “The weirdness comes from the gluons. Quantum chromodynamics, the force that holds protons together, is
modeled closely on quantum electrodynamics, the force that holds atoms together—but the gluons change screening to anti-screening, intuitive to
bizarre.” And, “The closer you look, the more you find the proton is dissolving into lots of particles, each of which is carrying very, very
little energy," says Wilczek. "And the elements of reality that triggered the whole thing, the quarks, are these tiny little things in the middle of
the cloud. In fact, if you follow the evolution to infinitely short distances, the triggering charge goes to zero. If you really study the equations,
it gets almost mystical." More info here: discovermagazine.com...
5) Maybe God lives at the speed of light. I John 1:5 Verse: This is the message which we have heard from him and announce to you, that God is light,
and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we lie, and don’t tell the truth. But if we
walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses us from all sin.
Thought: The language in this passage is not metaphorical. John does not assert that God is "like light" or that he "can be compared to light." He
asserts that God is light, and contrasts this light to darkness. Darkness is the absence of light.
Speed of Light: Is defined such that the speed of light in a vacuum is exactly 299,792,458 miles per second.
6) Did you know Hebrews 11:1 ‘FAITH’ is the ‘SUBSTANCE’ of THINGS? Here’s one for ya: Check out these definitions
A) ‘Faith’- Greek ‘pitis’ Translation=belief (spoken)
B) ‘Substance’- Greek ‘hupostasis’ Translation=substructure/actual existence/real being/ substantial quality, nature, of a person or
Thank you for reading, God bless you…OT
Ninth, Any thoughts?