The issue of chance... (Evolution)

by Matt S. , Tuesday, June 02, 2009, 16:57 (5651 days ago) @ David Turell

Mr. Turell - You dismissed my statistical argument out of hand... I am not engaging in statistical chicanery. 500M years is no deterrent to my argument. Nor is 400M years. - What method did you use to derive your calculation in your previous post? And more importantly, what were its base assumptions? Shapiro certainly didn't provide this information in detail, so bringing him up is a red herring. - I'm not shifting this to an ad-hominem, but the claim here is that the beginning of life (and from dhm, the probability that certain organs arose by chance) is statistically improbable. I've studied probability theory, probably more than either of you. (As I don't know your credentials, I can't say that for certain.) - What makes something more improbable is its base assumptions. Time and time again, I've hit creationists who use an identical line of reasoning. - This is a site that deals with a mathematician answering questions dealing with evolution, but it applies here as the probabilistic perspective of scientists (and many atheists) is this: - http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/probability-one.html - It is long, but if anyone here wants a laymen introduction into what is actually some fairly complex probability, go right on ahead, learning is good!