posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:38 AM
probability theory, very interesting . i think i remember the narrator making similar videos along atheist lines .
he pours a fairly bitter attitude into his rationale , but this is sometimes refreshing in the face of his contemporarys's ridiculousness , which i
am sure he has enjoyed arguing with, for the sake of debate.
i want to point out an angle where he is wrong , and potentially where he is allowing his own beleifs to cloud his seemingly unbiased approach ,
and that is where he says humans have used adaptive reasoning and recognition of coincidence to actually live within a the earth's "hostile"
environment , and that we have become "so called masters of our environment"
these quickly put assumptions within a torrent of rhetoric he produces , are a place to stop and say , why do you say the environment is hostile?
there are a multitude of reasons why the environment is not hostile , for example you can eat greens , breathe with no problem , run , walk , jump ,
the list is endless. you can build houses , farm animals, store supplies and clean up with tools , you can put your feet up in an armchair.
he has discounted then the perspective called "looking on the bright side" to take his science into a colder form of disdain, where no one is
allowed any sprinkling of magic nor any giving of thanks .because he is an atheist.
maths doesnt prove atheism , far from it . but the rest of his approach to probablility theory has raised the issues as he has drawn them out for us.
what is missing , and that gap being crucial in assessment of coincidences , is the foresight aspect . a coincidence in hindsight is of course
overlooked immediately , as he took pains to point out . but the foresight aspect , that is where his maths is going to confound people , and make
them look at just how very valuable these type of coincidence are . so he doesnt bother to impress people with the sheer numbers involved in foresight