Chance v. Design Part 4 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, July 04, 2009, 18:25 (5619 days ago) @ George Jelliss

Matt/xeno claims: "The problem here is, that to discuss biological systems and probabilities, you and I would have to be on the same page mathematically. That means you'd have to know some dynamics and chaos, and some calculus-based probability." 
> 
> Sorry Matt, but I'm sure DT and DHW have a sufficient understanding of the gambler's fallacy, and don't need to see it expressed in higher mathematical mandarin. This is just argumentum ad obfuscation. - 
Thank you George for dhw and myself. I've read a great deal about chaos, fractal theory, and in med school we had to understand probability theory. In fact I just read an article (already knew all the statistical concepts and fully understood them) I loved on the "Triumph of Random" in the WSJ (because I was 11 years old when Joe DiMaggio had his 56 game string: - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204556804574261942466979118.html