Proof of intelligent design

Luckily the English language has two different words that prove you incorrect:

"improbable" vs. "impossible"

If they were perfect analogs then we wouldn't have the other. Maybe you should change your argument.

Speaking of evolution and transistors, natural selection is being used to design them and other types of electronic components. There was an article is pop sci about it a year or so ago. I can't remember the exact type of compenent they were designing (I think it was a printed circuit cell phone antenna). The computer program would make random mutations of the design and then test each one for efficiency, signal amplification, and other criteria. The computer, through random mutation, came up with two designs that had already been patented. It eventually came up with a design more efficient than anything that has previously been created by an intelligent designer.

This one, eschewing co-dependence, can no longer give a flying FIC whether your mind is changed or not. Stew in your own meager juice.

/me goes to dance on the head of a pin.

If you give me infinity to do it, then I could do it. It would take a very very very long time, but it could be done

The part you must remember is that there is no record of how much time came before the big bang. Therefore, prior to the forming of the universe (by whichever method you prescribe to), there was an infinite amount of time.

And it only had to happen once.

It's posts like the above that make reading the forums so enjoyable!

*passes Chip, who DOES look like Chester Brown, a piece of pie*

I'm curious, how do you know the total number of chances that the basic blocks of life had to roll the dice?

I'm also curious how you are going to argue for intelligent design when you can't even define thought or reason. (Especially if you believe in a divine, unknowable supreme being-- which you didn't say one way or the other, but it would certainly make you more absurd and fun.)

Damn, girl! I *never* see you in the forums!

*grins, offers Nala a piece of what's left of that pie*

This sounds like the kind of stuff The Creativity Machine by Stepehn Thaler does. It invented the Oral B Crossaction toothbrush.

Cream pie?

No one can "show" you that in the sense of forcing it to happen so you can see it happen.

However while it is statistically unlikely for it to happen, it can happen in that each time the coin is flipped there is always the same equal chance that it will land on heads, no matter how many times it has landed on heads before.

One can argue that life in the universe and therefore intelligence is very unlikely but given the immense size of the multidimensional space we inhabit, even a "one a billion billion shot" has got to happen sooner or later, and all it takes is once.

Most of the latest evidence is pointing towards the "Panspermia Hypothesis" as the best model for the origins of life on earth, and indications are that the space between the stars is full of amino acids and the building blocks of life. Thus the universe could be literally teeming with life and all that would be necessary for this to be possible is that once somewhere, some life evolved spontaneously.

If you want to interpret this in a religious sense, you could argue that God appeared a long long long time ago when the universe was young and created life somewhere, once. The rest of the universe would simply follow on that event, just as it is suposed to follow on the "spontaneous" event that most envision.

I personally believe there is room for the Flying Spaghetti Monster in my religion.

Aeons ago, Our Father sat down with the Heavenly Host for a good hearty meal. As He was eating spaghetti (all covered with cheese) he tried for the meatball, when he happened to sneeze. The spaghetti landed all over the floor, and the Heavenly Noodle just rolled out the door. Thus the Holy Pasta was born into our world, in much the same way as the duck-billed platypus.

This tale teaches us one of the key tenets of Pastafarism: If you eat spaghetti all covered with cheese, hold onto your meatballs whenever you sneeze.

RAmen.

Long pig, actually.

Shuffling a deck of cards puts them into a particular order. What is the probability that someone else, sometime in the past, has shuffled a deck of cards into the exact same order? The number of different ways to order a deck of cards is 52!= 8.0658 x 1067. To understand how big this number is, let us suppose that everyone on earth, from the beginning of time, has been doing nothing but shuffling cards and checking what order the deck is in. Let’s overdo it, and suppose that mankind has been on earth for a million years, and that the population of the earth was constantly equal to 10 billion. If we can do one shuffle per second, then the total number of shuffles in history is 10,000,000,000 x 1,000,000 x 365 x 24 x 60 x 60 = 3.1536 x 1023. This is less than one billionth of one billionth of one billionth of the total number of possible shuffles. Every single deck shuffle produces a unique result, yah! It is has never, ever happened before!


Either way, I can believe the miracle of something that is *mathematically impossible* actually happened as well as that a higher being created the universe.

In fact scientists don't say that, kevin. At least one scientist, a piker by the name of einstien pointed out in a universe of infinite possibilites, every that had to have occurred once. Combintations of existing molecules and attoms in to protiens to create life maybe hungel uncommon, but the universe is infinte. Therefore no mattter how uncommon, there is always a chance it happened.

Unlike a transcendent intelligent god, the raw stuff of protiens actually exists, and therefore we are dealing with the raw probabaility of combining existing things. In this case infinityis on the side of the creationists. The universe is so big that life had to happen, even by accident.

However, your article addresses the subject in a vaccum. I takes a purely statisical look at the topic. What a scientist would do is examine other conditions that influence the outcome. Once to reflect posutalated condiction that existed when life was formed on earth, then we get probabilities that are much reduced from those inimated by the pure math of the article. Its not the age of the article that is problematic, it is its relieance on pure statistics and not evidence.

Thus is it very much akin to the "all water drinkers are drug dealers" tautology.

You're making many mistakes:

1. Evolution (change over time) is something that occurs to inanimate objects as well. One does not need to be alive to change.
   
2. Stating that an inanimate structure or organism has an infinitesimal probability of arriving at its current state only proves that the process was not random. For instance crystal growth is not wholly random but one could say the probability of its constituent atoms arriving in that form are infinitesimal.
   
3. Life is nothing more than a complex regulated chemical reaction that has its roots in elementary molecular chemical reactions. The same environmental pressures that drive natural selection exist at a molecular level as well.

I'd go on but I just know you won't get it.

~Ulrika~

Close.

Chip is actually famous cartoonist Joe Matt.
That's why he studiously avoided posting on Lector's "peeing in the sink" thread.

It's a joke he isn't really Joe Matt and peeing in the sink is just wrong!

/me pictured you using "The Ol' Explaining Hand" as you said that. Hee!

.

Gomer's history of the Universe volume I, book 1:

"Hot damn, I gotta turtle head stickin out! Where to pull over... where to pull over... That blue orb looks nice!"

And thus was the first bacteria introduced to earth.

End of Book 1.

Crystals are self replicating moleculas, in a given environment. Did they need an intelligent maker? More complex moleculas, self replicating, do exist just because they can, according to the laws of Nature. What i mean is: amino acids and proteins aren't "weird". They are aggregations of atoms that are compliant to the same laws crystals and other moleculas obey to. The only point here is: why do we have these laws? Were they decided by any intelligent being, with infinite power on our universe? Is that being part of our universe?

I have my own idea, not actual answers to these questions (being part of our universe and being intelligent, for any being, would imply a complex structure - if you don't consider a certain super intelligent shade of blue... - and that would hardly fit with the idea of a "creator of everything".

I think this should be the point where believers, atheists and agnostics could have an interesting discussion. Creationists simply moved too forward along the path...




Damn! I knew that! I wasn't here and you folks ate all the pie

F*ck 'em and their law! All I ever needed to know, I learned from The Jilted Generation (screw that Toxic Avenger guy).



I'm sure there's plenty of people here who would love to give you a cream pie.

Yes--- Natalie would:


http://www.movieactors.com/photos-60/piefight.jpeg

A huge flaw is that the protein in question is not the product of a test tube of a variety of amino acids of both left and right chirality. A living system only contains amino acids of left chirality.

In living systems, proteins are created with left handed chirality because the rights are not used. So the probability that a protein molecule will be composed exclusively of left handed amino acids in a system that contains only left handed amino acids is pretty much 100%.

The first living system did not consist of what is referred to as "A typical protein is made up of a chain of 445 left-handed amino acids." All it needed was to be the simplest set of amino acids necessary.


The analogy of using a coin flip for the likelihood of getting left handed amino acids in a chain of 445 is invalid. A better analogy would be to use a bag of only white marbles and asking the likelihood of putting your hand in the bag and pulling out a white marble 445 times - or a million times - in a row. Of course the likelihood is 100%.

Coundn't resist.
Before he got his hair cut, Joe Matt did look like Chip.

PS - Sorry if I was rude to you at the Nburg dance the other day, you're even scarier in person!