The Odds of Evolution Are Zero

Townhall.com ^ | JUne 15. 2017 | Jerry Newcombe

[Bob434]

macroevolution is impossible mathematically, chemically, thermodynamically- biologically- and that lateral gene transference has no real world higher species examples- symbiotic parasitic infections are not gene transference- but they conveniently ignored all those facts. The world’s top mathemeticians held several symposiums proving that macroevoltuion is so far beyond the upper probability limits that it is impossible- not by a little, but by such a significant amount that the hypothesis of macroevolution is not possible-

[HLPhat]

>>deals with all the times AFTER the beginning of life and says nothing about how life began.

False - it just deals with it thus:

“This step still remains unverified to science as of this writing.”

http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/how-could-dna-have-evolved

[samtheman]

That’s not really dealing with it. But anyway “dealing with it” is my words and open to about a hundred different interpretations.

The point is, it’s not part of the theory, just as what banged, how it banged or why it banged isn’t part of the Big Bang Theory (not talking about the TV show).

[HLPhat]

>>That’s not really dealing with it.

They deal with it by propping up the model with the usual facsimile of “a miracle happens here”.

Odd how, even with all our STEM, our technocratic self-worshiping culture can’t produce an RNA molecule from non-living chemical raw materials that can independently replicate itself into identical RNA molecules that sustain the LIVING process and produce multiple generations.

>>how it banged

That is covered in the quantum cosmology - but the ultimate origin of E remains a mystery.

[samtheman]

Not really. Everything AFTER t=0 is covered... but t=0 (how, why, what banged) is not covered.

Don’t argue with me about it. Take it up with Alan Guth. He says it all the time.

[HLPhat]

>>but t=0 (how, why, what banged) is not covered.

At T=0 the universe popped into existence like a bubble from another universe.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Universe+is+a+bubble

But even though that model covers T=0 (for the universe the modelers live in), it still leaves the ultimate origin of E a mystery.

[samtheman]

At T=0 the universe popped into existence like a bubble from another universe.

---

I actually agree with that, but it’s not really part of standard cosmology.

[HLPhat]

>>but it’s not really part of standard cosmology.

“Most often the model also sees inflation producing a proliferation of universes, a multiverse filled with a cornucopia of realities.”

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/innovators/2014/06/140630-alan-guth-profile-inflation-cosmology-science/

[samtheman]

I actually am partial to that idea but you know as well as I do that “a proliferation of universes” is not part of standard cosmology, and Guth says so himself, even though he, like Linde, Greene and others are also partial to the concept of “eternal inflation”. But inflation itself is still (sadly) lacking the polarizations to finally verify it. I’m hoping the newer telescopes will fix that.

[HLPhat]

>>is not part of standard cosmology,

"Guth's inflationary  theory predicted."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/innovators/2014/06/140630-alan-guth-profile-inflation-cosmology-science/

Inflation is part of the standard cosmology.  Guth's "multiverse" is just a model for inflation.

In the first 10^-34 seconds or so of the universe's history, it underwent a brief period of extremely fast expansion, known as inflation. This period smoothed out the universe's original lumpiness and left it with the homogeneity and isotropy we see today. Quantum mechanical fluctuations during this process were imprinted on the universe as density fluctuations, which later seeded the formation of structure.

http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/CosmologyEssays/The_Standard_Cosmology.html

[Pirate Ragnar]

“You intellectual pygmies are so predictable.”

You won’t score any points in the discussion with name calling, which is usually an excuse for failing to make your point. Save your popcorn for the ball game.

[samtheman]

Ok. You win.

[HLPhat]

Ok. But I’m not much of a fan of the multiverse miracle explanation - which still doesn’t address the ultimate miracle origin of E as well as John 1:1 does.

[Bob434]

his point was pretty clear to me- life from nothing has hurdles so tall they can’t be crossed naturally-

[Bob434]

sorry- meant life from non life- not life from nothing

[TexasGator]

“nge is to show how you create life from that which is non-life”

GOD did it. Now can we all go home?

[Agamemnon]

You won’t score any points in the discussion with name calling, which is usually an excuse for failing to make your point.

Tell the same to Trump, then come back later and tell me who's winning. The Daily Win / The Daily Battle, DAY 140. ARCHIVE #001 (courtesy of FReeper Lazamataz) Sorry, but that maxim as a rule simply doesn't fly anymore.

See you in the arena.

Bro better come prepared with more than just mocked-up "global warming"-style artificial computer models fed with the fertile imaginations of self-important grant-grubbers to back him up.

Absent evidence based in good science it'll be a bullshit caller's checkmate.

Care to take your own stab at trying to hold forth on what scientific evidence exists that supports abiogensis?

FReegards!

[hawg-farmer - FR..October 1998]

EVOLUTION IS A Fact, if NOT you would still be in the primordial soup, with Your Primal Screem..That is not so say we evolved from MONKEYS, but EVOLUTION is a fact..

The Big Five Mass Extinctions:

End Ordovician, 444 million years ago, 86% of species lost
— Graptolite 2-3 cm length
Late Devonian, 375 million years ago, 75% of species lost
— Trilobite, 5 cm length
End Permian, 251 million years ago, 96% of species lost
— Tabulate coral, 5 CM
End Triassic, 200 million years ago, 80% of species lost
— Conodont teeth 1 mm
End Cretaceous, 66 million years ago, 76% of all species lost
— Ammonite 15 cm length
Humans had NOTHING to do with this! Heh heh

[RFEngineer]

“A monkey sits at a typewriter and types thousands of pages.”

I admire this monkeys evolved use of tools. Where did he get the typewriter?

I think this monkey writes a column for the New York Times.

[BroJoeK]

aquila48: " Sorry you’re missing out on Myers arguments - you might learn something you didn’t know... or are you one of those “settled science” guys?"

Strictly speaking, no science is ever fully "settled".
All ideas & facts are subject to falsification at any time by new data or better ideas.
That's a key condition making natural-science fundamentally different from any religion.

As for your Myers FRiend, I'll repeat my guess that most or all of those arguments have been posted & debated at length on these threads.
Unless you know of some great new idea that somehow escaped us so far?