Pigliucci Challenges Randomness (Religion)

by David Turell , Monday, January 18, 2010, 16:02 (5421 days ago) @ xeno6696

Fallacy 4: Natural Phenomena Mean Randomness
> 
> "For some reason many people, not just creationists, seem to think that if something is natural, then it must also be random (in the sense of being undirected and therefore, in the minds of those with a misunderstanding or ignorance of natural selection, clearly not designed). This is the basis for one of the most persistent fallacies of creationism: that evolution cannot be true because it purports to explain complexity in the biological world by means of random accidents."
> 
> Before I continue, David, dhw, does any of this pertain to your views? I don't want to waste valuable time. -
In my analysis evolution happened. What we are debating or arguing is the methodology by which evolution goes from simple to complex. I cannot believe that what we see, in ourselves, for example, is simply the result of a series of random contingent events. Yes, I understand that any single unexpected event can appear against seemingly enormous odds. But the size of the series of such events is so enormous that odds for randomness become unreasonable. Life, with all its recognized complexity appeared in 800 million years from the establishment of a planet, and about 400 million years after the temperature dropped to extremophile levels. All the odds I have seen calculated favor my contention: DNA is coded for advancing complexity and evolution. Therefore there is a universal intelligence. Where does the information in DNA come from? Have any of us ever seen a code developed randomly? Randomness in this situation demands absolute faith.