You've got 10 to the 40th possible mutations against a search space 10 to the 77th strong right so if you do your exponential math you end up with 1/10 trillion trillion trillionth of the possible combinations so in that case are you more likely to succeed or fail--you're overwhelmingly more likely to fail to find one of the functional combinations even taking into account every organism that's lived on earth
I'm pretty sure that you were already convinced before you learned of Stephen Meyer.
He merely confirmed what you wished to believe.
Aspasia: "You've got 10 to the 40th possible mutations against a search space 10 to the 77th strong right so if you do your exponential math you end up with 1/10 trillion trillion trillionth of the possible combinations so in that case are you more likely to succeed or fail--you're overwhelmingly more likely to fail to..."
G.I.G.O. rules your mind, FRiend.
Such calculations are worse that useless when based on false assumptions and misunderstood processes.
The reality is, any chemical reaction is naturally guaranteed to happen, once conditions for it are right -- that's 100% probability, not 1 in 10 to anything.
And the chemical reactions hypothesized by abiogenesis are never "life" springing up magically in one step, but rather likely millions of little baby-steps scattered over billions of years = maybe one important change every thousand years, somewhere, anywhere, on Earth.
So, it's not a matter of "probabilities", but rather of when, where and what conditions were needed to make each tiny baby-step inevitable, from chemistry to biology.
