Statistics, God and Estimating

[alang1216]

Google response:

No, an individual organism cannot evolve within its own lifetime; evolution is a process that occurs over many generations, affecting populations, not individuals. While individuals may experience developmental changes or environmental adaptations during their lives, these are not changes in their genes and therefore not considered evolution. True evolutionary change involves shifts in the inherited genetic makeup of a population over time, driven by mechanisms like mutation and natural selection.

Why individuals don't evolve:

• Inherited traits:
  An individual is born with a set of genes that do not change over its lifetime.
  
  
• Generational process:
  Evolution is a change in the frequency of alleles (forms of genes) within a population across generations.

Everything evolves but not all evolution is biological.

 

[Woodznutz]

Evolution does NOT replace God. If there is a God, He created this world and evolution was one of His tools. If you deny evolution you deny God.

I believe God created adaptation in his critters, not evolution. Like animals shedding winter coats early if the weather gets hot. It's built-in from the get-go. No need to wait a million years for it to evolve.

 

[alang1216]

I believe God created adaptation in his critters, not evolution. Like animals shedding winter coats early if the weather gets hot. It's built-in from the get-go. No need to wait a million years for it to evolve.

You telling God how to be God? Adaptation does not explain the appearance of new species in the fossil record.

 

[BackAgain]

The theory of Evolution is a FACT

The theory is, as the term itself clearly denotes, a theory.

You don’t grasp anything even grade school level basic about science.

The FACT that complex creatures evolved from simple creatures cannot be denied.

I accept the theory is correct. But that doesn’t make the theory of evolution itself a “fact.”

The hows and whys may be debated, but the fact that it happens is irrefutable

That some organisms have — over many thousands of years and longer — have morphed into different organisms is something I accept as pretty obvious.

But the THEORY of evolution says far more than that.

Evolution does NOT replace God. If there is a God, He created this world and evolution was one of His tools. If you deny evolution you deny God.

i don’t believe your final sentence is on the mark. But I agree with your contention that God could have chosen to make use of evolution in order to have His creation continue to grow and “advance.”

 

[rightwinger]

I accept the theory is correct. But that doesn’t make the theory of evolution itself a “fact.

As you don’t accept the theories of gravity and a spherical earth as fact

 

[BackAgain]

As you don’t accept the theories of gravity and a spherical earth as fact

Different theories.

Since you dispense with speaking accurately, I’ll simply note that if I have a rock in my hand while standing on good old planet Earth, and then let go, the rock will fall.

The very curvature of the Earth has long since been proved — beyond any doubt at all (notwithstanding the nonsense spewed by the “flat Earthers”) — to be a sphere. Not a true debate.

The Theory of Evolution depends on a multitude of assumptions which have not yet been established.

If we agree that, through a process of mutations over many generations, organisms grow and change, then we also need to accept as a given that all the other assumptions of the Theory of Evolution in order to call it a “fact.”

In any event, you’re just being petulant.

 

[rightwinger]

The Theory of Evolution depends on a multitude of assumptions which have not yet been established.

If we agree that, through a process of mutations over many generations, organisms grow and change, then we also need to accept as a given that all the other assumptions of the Theory of Evolution in order to call it a “fact.”

It is a FACT that complex organisms evolved from simpler organisms

Can’t be denied

 

[BackAgain]

It is a FACT that complex organisms evolved from simpler organisms

Can’t be denied

As I believe I already said, it certainly does appear that organisms over many generations become different organisms via mutations in the DNA.

I don’t recall denying that component of evolution.

That doesn’t make the “Theory of Evolution,” itself, a “fact.”

 

[ChemEngineer]

You know jack shit about biology.



Same old bullshit from the resentful retards.

Go learn some math.

Why do you idiots refuse to learn math?

scruffy is the perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, unabashed arrogance spouting and huffing - a tempest in a teapot.

Don't run away from science and retreat into the vile domain of a mediocre Charles Darwin which has led scores of millions to destructive atheism.

Read and learn: The Selection Fraud

 

[scruffy]

scruffy is the perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, unabashed arrogance spouting and huffing - a tempest in a teapot.

Don't run away from science and retreat into the vile domain of a mediocre Charles Darwin which has led scores of millions to destructive atheism.

Read and learn: The Selection Fraud

You're out of your league.

Your statistics are wrong. Already proven

Your biology is wrong. Already proven.

You are wrong.

Period.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

You know nothing about biochemistry, and even less about statistics, as you have repeatedly demonstrated with these ignorant posts.

You are a religious troll, nothing more.

Why don't you just accept that you are in awe of God's handiwork and leave it at that. You're not qualified to cross into the domain of science and mathematics.

Your post (as I've pointed out before) is ad-hominem.

If his argument can be challenged then challenge it don't attack the person.

If a person submitted a questionable working for a mathematics problem, would the fact that they believed in God be the way to refute their reasoning?

 

[ReinyDays]

Your post (as I've pointed out before) is ad-hominem.

If his argument can be challenged then challenge it don't attack the person.

If a person submitted a questionable working for a mathematics problem, would the fact that they believed in God be the way to refute their reasoning?

They're name calling each other ... why are you only bitching at one of the children ...

ChemEngineer doesn't even know what an enzyme is ... which means he knows very little about chemistry ... yet he declares himself as a chemical engineer ... that's a falsehood, or a lie ... and despite this being pointed out to him repeatedly, he insists on calling himself a chemical engineer ...

That makes him a liar ... what does the Bible say to do to liars? ...

I'm just refuting his math, and his chemistry ... but mostly I'm refuting his understanding of God ... if the peacemakers are blessed, what do we call those who monger war? ...

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

They're name calling each other ... why are you only bitching at one of the children ...

ChemEngineer doesn't even know what an enzyme is

How do you know he doesn't?

... which means he knows very little about chemistry ... yet he declares himself as a chemical engineer ... that's a falsehood, or a lie ... and despite this being pointed out to him repeatedly, he insists on calling himself a chemical engineer ...

That makes him a liar ... what does the Bible say to do to liars? ...

I'm just refuting his math, and his chemistry ... but mostly I'm refuting his understanding of God ... if the peacemakers are blessed, what do we call those who monger war? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

How do you know he doesn't?

I asked him ...

 

[scruffy]

I'm just refuting his math, and his chemistry ... but mostly I'm refuting his understanding of God ...

The guy's a ridiculous little troll. He's calling people he doesn't know atheists and says Darwin will get them there. Very damn ridiculous. Maybe he's a leftard trying to give fundies a bad name.

 

[ReinyDays]

The guy's a ridiculous little troll. He's calling people he doesn't know atheists and says Darwin will get them there. Very damn ridiculous. Maybe he's a leftard trying to give fundies a bad name.

He's like a Middle School kid who hides in the school library during lunch because, well, even the cheerleaders like beating him up ...

Fundies make themselves look bad ... supporting a whoremonger for President ... shame on them ...

 

[scruffy]

He's like a Middle School kid who hides in the school library during lunch because, well, even the cheerleaders like beating him up ...

Fundies make themselves look bad ... supporting a whoremonger for President ... shame on them ...

This:

Apparently he stole the dress.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

While some might argue that this post belongs in a religion forum, I wish to point out that it is purely scientific, based on modern biochemistry coupled with statistics. The correspondence between science and its Creator continues to unfold.
--------------------------------------------------------------

A great many people get wrapped up in definitions that are erroneous.
Mathematicians have been known to say, "Nothing is impossible unless its probability is zero."
While that sounds plausible, let's look at reality.
Distinguished mathematician, Emile Borel, defined "impossible" as one chance in 10 to the 50th or less.
Ten to the 50 is 1 followed by fifty zeroes.

Before reading any further, what volume do you estimate 10 to the 50 small marbles would occupy?
/
/
/
/
/
Ten to the 50 marbles 1 cm in diameter would fill 37,400 billion billion spheres the size of earth.

So who thinks it is possible to select one out of 37,400 billion billion spheres, and from that one enormous sphere full of 1 cm marbles, blindfolded, on your first and only try, get the unique marble?

Titin is the largest protein in the human body, at 38,138 amino acid residues in a precise sequence.

I did the calculation to evaluate the probability of titin's original synthesis from any natural mechanism you can imagine, being 1/20 amino acids selected one at a time taken to the 38,138th power times two other factors which produce a probability for titin's original synthesis of 1 in about 10 to the 72,000th power. Those two other factors are the exclusive selection of L amino acids and not R amino acids, which works out to 1/2 to the 38,138th. Similarly, amino acids can bond by peptide bonds, where the -OH radical links to an -H radical, or a non-peptide bond, where it does not. This constitutes another factor of 1/2 to the 38,138th power.

This is insanely beyond impossible and titin is only one of over 20,000 different proteins in the human body.

This nonsense still belongs in the "religion" section.

 

[scruffy]

This nonsense still belongs in the "religion" section.

No. It belongs in the trash.

 

[ChemEngineer]

This nonsense still belongs in the "religion" section.

Spoken like a godless Leftist who belongs on my Ignore List.

ciao brutto