The Evolution Fraud

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by ChemEngineer, Nov 19, 2019.

  1. ChemEngineer
    Offline

    ChemEngineer VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    Messages:
    235
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    60
    Ratings:
    +233
    The Insuperable Statistics of Life - Scientific Proof of Nature's God


    Intelligent design has been viciously attacked, not so much for its claim that design can be detected, and not so much for the mathematical methods it uses, but because it trumps the belief system of those who consider themselves to be our ruling intellectual elite. It trumps Scientism. – Counting to God, A Personal Journey Through Science to Belief, by Douglas Ell, p 50

    Dembski suggests a lower bound, a “universal probability limit,” of 1 in 10 to the 150. He gets that by taking the number of protons, neutrons and electrons in the visible universe (10 to the 80), multiplying it by the number of seconds since the creation of the universe (about 4 times 10 to the 17), and multiplying by 10 to the 43 units of “Planck time” in each second. (Planck time is theoretically the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible.) – p 52

    ----------------------

    Now consider the universal probability limit of 1 in 10 the 150th power in comparison to any naturalistic synthesis of a modest human protein of just 300 amino acid residues in length.

    1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20... 300 times is 1 chance in 20 to the 300th power, which is equal to 1 chance in 10 to the 390th power.

    Titin is a protein in the muscles of everyone reading this. Titin is 34,350 amino acid residues in length. Please do the math. There are at least 5,000 different proteins in your body. Do the math. 1 chance in 10 to the 150th is statistically equivalent to 0.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Mac1958
    Offline

    Mac1958 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    61,734
    Thanks Received:
    10,984
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Just another nut on a message board
    Ratings:
    +51,461
    No one really knows where we came from, or how we got here.

    Anyone who thinks they have The Answer is delusional and egotistical.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
  3. andaronjim
    Offline

    andaronjim Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2015
    Messages:
    18,117
    Thanks Received:
    2,979
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Floor E Da
    Ratings:
    +17,560
    Science is based on Theory until it is PROVEN factual. We keep seeing the dinosaur evolve from a slow moving reptile to a faster sauropod. Until we can figure out how to travel back in time, we will always have a theory of evolution, no facts.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Erinwltr
    Offline

    Erinwltr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2018
    Messages:
    5,905
    Thanks Received:
    635
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +3,678
    Reminds me of a lyric in a Kansas song, Carry on Wayward Son.
    "And if I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know"
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    53,435
    Thanks Received:
    6,521
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +29,422
    Odds are against winning Mega Millions....people still win.
     
  6. ReinyDays
    Offline

    ReinyDays Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages:
    587
    Thanks Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    45
    Location:
    State of Jefferson
    Ratings:
    +293
    That's nuts ... 1 in 10 to the 150th power isn't anywhere close to zero ... for a chemical engineer, you sure have an odd sense of what is small ... yeesh ... and your artistic talents come in short ... you're asking the wrong question ...

    It doesn't matter how small the odds are of an enzyme forming in any given Planck Time Unit (PTU) ... given enough PTU's, the formation of this enzyme at least once approaches certainty, and we certainly have enough PTU's ... and thus our basic assumption, once is enough ... for example: the odds of rolling a four with a die is 1 in 6 ... but what are the odds of rolling a four at least once in a billion rolls ... not certainty, but close ... or a better example, a kilogram of methane in a vessel at 1 atmosphere pressure and 100ºC, what are the odds of absolutely NO ethane forming? ...

    Now do your mathing again, this time instead of a 34,350 amino acid protein, only use the 21 enzymes needed to form this protein, the same enzymes to form any protein ... you're a chemical engineer, you should know this ...
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. alang1216
    Offline

    alang1216 Pragmatist

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    8,047
    Thanks Received:
    632
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,670
    You're correct the, odds of a protein just happening by chance is remote. What you are ignoring is evolution and natural selection. Imagine a single chimp on a typewriter (do those even exist anymore?) hitting keys. The odds of him typing out the Declaration of Independance are also very remote. However, if someone watched him work and removed any letter he typed until he randomly hit a 'W' he'd pretty quickly get that first letter. If the process was repeated and only an 'H' was not removed, again it would not take much time and he'd be on his way to "When in the course..."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    12,842
    Thanks Received:
    1,974
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,976
    As usual, its most strident advocates confuse evolution with adaptation. The former is a tidy theory with no direct evidence to back it up, whereas the latter is easily observable and replicated.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. Ringel05
    Offline

    Ringel05 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Messages:
    56,259
    Thanks Received:
    10,618
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Duke City
    Ratings:
    +34,715
    Attempting to prove God exists utilizing man's science is as foolish and fruitless as attempting to prove God doesn't exist utilizing man's science.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
  10. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    30,734
    Thanks Received:
    3,366
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,481
    ID is belief in something, other than the natural world we observe where we live and die in, created us and the world we live in.

    On Scientism:

    "So if science is distinct from scientism, what is it? Science is an activity that seeks to explore the natural world using well-established, clearly-delineated methods. Given the complexity of the universe, from the very big to very small, from inorganic to organic, there is a vast array of scientific disciplines, each with its own specific techniques. The number of different specializations is constantly increasing, leading to more questions and areas of exploration than ever before. Science expands our understanding, rather than limiting it.

    Scientism, on the other hand, is a speculative worldview about the ultimate reality of the universe and its meaning. Despite the fact that there are millions of species on our planet, scientism focuses an inordinate amount of its attention on human behavior and beliefs. Rather than working within carefully constructed boundaries and methodologies established by researchers, it broadly generalizes entire fields of academic expertise and dismisses many of them as inferior. With scientism, you will regularly hear explanations that rely on words like “merely”, “only”, “simply”, or “nothing more than”. Scientism restricts human inquiry.

    It is one thing to celebrate science for its achievements and remarkable ability to explain a wide variety of phenomena in the natural world. But to claim there is nothing knowable outside the scope of science would be similar to a successful fisherman saying that whatever he can’t catch in his nets does not exist (15). Once you accept that science is the only source of human knowledge, you have adopted a philosophical position (scientism) that cannot be verified, or falsified, by science itself. It is, in a word, unscientific."

    What is Scientism?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2

Share This Page