Replies

William Demski also has shown the mathematical impossibility of macroevolution- It's so far above the upper limits of probability that it renders it impossible- Back in the 70's i think it was- there was also a symposium of the top scientists and mathematicians of the time who also concluded it was mathematically impossible- and we're not talking just 'sort of impossible' it's totally impossible- A ZERO PROBABILITY of happening- and htis is just for even one mutation to occur to even begin to move a species beyond it's own kind by adding new non species specific information in order to so alter the species kind that it starts to becoem another kind altogether- ad in reality, this would have had to happen billions of times- not just once, or a few times- if everything originated from one species, or from single cells-

Here is a bit more info on the impossibility:

http://creationdesign.org/english/chances.html

An occurrence that has more than one chance in 10⁵⁰, it has a statistically zero chance of actually occurring.

"Mathematicians agree that any requisite number beyond 10⁵⁰ has, statistically, a zero probability of occurrence."

I.L. Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong: A Study in Probabilities (New York: NW Research Publications, Inc., 1984), p. 205 (as quoted in Vance Ferrell, The Evolution Handbook (Evolution Facts, Inc., Altamont TN, 2001) p. 260

In order to circumvent the problem of statistical zero, evolutionists often argue that "Given enough time, anything can happen." This is not a rational argument. It proves nothing. It is a reference to practically infinite periods of time that lie beyond statistical zero.

"A further aspect I should like to discuss is what I call the practice of avoiding the conclusion that the probability of a self-producing state is zero ... When for practical purposes the condition of infinite time and matter has to be invoked, the concept of probability is annulled. By such logic we can prove anything ... "

P.T. Mora, The Folly of Probability, as quoted in Origins 13(2):98-104 (1986) Geoscience Research Institute, Loma Lind University, 1986. Emphasis supplied.

In fact the chances of the chance formation of just DNA - much less all of the applications of DNA - are so remote, they are far beyond statistical zero.

"This means that 10⁸⁹¹⁹⁰ DNA molecules, on average, must form to provide the one chance of forming the specific DNA sequence necessary to code 124 proteins. 10⁸⁹¹⁹⁰ DNAs would weigh 10⁸⁹¹⁴⁷ more than the earth ... A quantity of DNA this colossal could never have been formed.

R.L. Wysong, The Creation Evolution Controversy, (Inquiry Press, Midland MI, 1976) p.115, as quoted in The Evolution Handbook (Evolution Facts, Inc., Altamont TN, 2001) p. 261. Same Website as above

Playing the lottery does not raise you chance of winning by more than a minuscule amount.

Still, some people do win the lottery.

Are those figures assuming that atoms can combine higgledy-piggledy in totally random ways, or did they take the valences into account, did they assume that one could get a molecule of a hundred hydrogen atoms all strung together, or a carbon bonded to 12 other atoms?

That assumption vastly simplifies the calculation, but in no way reflects reality, and hugely inflates the final number over what is chemically possible.

link is 404 error.

your link doesn’t work ... could you post the correct link, i’m interested in what you’re trying to point to ...