I'm one of those who also believe in the truth of mathematical odds. I am certain there is other intelligent life in the universe. That same data will tell us that we are closer to the middle of that intelligence rating line than either end.
For any disbelievers I have a bet for you. I'll bet you at the odds of 40 billion to one, that any specific team in the NFL will win the superbowl next year. As long as I can place that bet I'll put one dollar down on each team.
Save your dollar, and don't bet on the Lions.
I’ll take your bet. 40Billion:1 versus 10^161:1
That means there wouldn’t be enough money in the entire world to pay your bet off to me.
As discussed in various abiogenesis threads such as this one
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2986560/replies?c=62
Oops. Starting with 1/10^23 is far too generous. It’s 1/10^161.
http://www.tedmontgomery.com/bblovrvw/creation/crea-evol.html
DeNouy provides another illustration for arriving at a single molecule of high dissymmetry through chance action and normal thermic agitation. He assumes 500 trillion shakings per second plus a liquid material volume equal to the size of the earth. For one molecule it would require “10^243 billions of years.” Even if this molecule did somehow arise by chance, it is still only one single molecule. Hundreds of millions are needed, requiring compound probability calculations for each successive molecule. His logical conclusion is that “it is totally impossible to account scientifically [naturally] for all phenomena pertaining to life.”32
Even 40 years ago, scientist Harold F. Blum, writing in Time’s Arrow and Evolution, wrote that, “The spontaneous formation of a polypeptide of the size of the smallest known proteins seems beyond all probability.”33
Noted creation scientists Walter L. Bradley and Charles Thaxton, authors of The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Reassessing Current Theories, point out that the probability of assembling amino acid building blocks into a functional protein is approximately one chance in 4.9 × 10191.34 “Such improbabilities have led essentially all scientists who work in the field to reject random, accidental assembly or fortuitous good luck as an explanation for how life began.”35 Now, if a figure as “small” as 5 chances in 10191 is referenced by such a statement, then what are we to make of the kinds of probabilities below that, which are infinitely less? The mind simply boggles at the remarkable faith of the materialist.
According to Coppedge, the probability of evolving a single protein molecule over 5 billion years is estimated at 1 chance in 10161. This even allows some 14 concessions to help it along which would not actually be present during evolution.36 Again, this is no chance.
How about I give you 40 billion to one odds that neither Jacksonville or the Redskins will win the Super bowl.
Mathematical odds and reality aren't the same thing. If it were, a monkey would have typed out at least a single paragraph of William Shakespeare by now.
Also, there is no mathematical proof that life began spontaneously on this planet, so extrapolating that equation is meaningless.