The issue of chance... (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, June 02, 2009, 17:34 (5451 days ago) @ Matt S.

You dismissed my statistical argument out of hand... I am not engaging in statistical chicanery. - I know you are not. 
 
> What method did you use to derive your calculation in your previous post? - Just using a probability bound, for emphasis. - > Shapiro certainly didn't provide this information in detail, so bringing him up is a red herring. - Have you read Shapiro? If not, you need to. He is pure honest skeptic, and a confirmed Darwinist. - > 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. What makes something more improbable is its base assumptions. - Our base assumptions are different. I am arguing from the position of organic chemistry, not math. Apply your statistics to organic chemistry and I might learn to agree with you. Nitrogon, oxygen, carbon and hydrogen just don't hop into organic molecules, for instance the basis of life, amino acids. Please note that meteorite research has shown that only eight of the 20 essential amino acids have ever been found occurring naturally from the outer space of this solar system. How do we assume that all 20 appeared here on Earth by natural methods? 
 
> http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/probability-one.html - I've read stuff like this before. One must read all sides. I BELIEVE EVOLUTION occurred. What we are really discussing is HOW? - Since you have not had time to review all of our past discussions, and we are very happy to have you on board, let me introduce myself. I am a retired Internist/Cardiologist who was an agnostic after medical school. Following a careful study of partical physics and the standard model of the universe, I concluded there is a greater power behind it. Studying Darwin only convinced me further. And this from my backgound in medical biochemistry. If Darwin knew how complex the single cell is, he would not have developed his theory as he did, based totally on microevolution. - I'm looking forward to further discussion.