[Dan Day]

"And what mathematical calculation do you plan to use to arrive at this probability? If you were going to say "(1/4)^N", you're wrong."

I'm fine with you inventing a strawman calculation that I never wrote, only to "knock it down" yourself,

Excuse me while I roll my eyes. I did nothing of the sort, and if this is the best sort of discussion you can manage, my patience with you is coming to an end. I said "if", Bucko. I never represented it as your actual position, which is a prerequisite for a Straw Man fallacy. I was merly pointing out that that's the probability calculation most creationists use when they try to address this issue, so I was heading it off at the pass if that's the direction you might have been going.

if you will at least post your own calculation for the probability in question.

Wow, what a lame dodge. I asked *you* for *your* calculation, Southack. Feel free to present it.

What is your calculation? You do have one, right??

Well *you* clearly don't, given how clumsily you tried to divert attention from *me* asking you for *yours*.

In fact, you claimed to have a calcuation so definite that it could calculate the "precise" (your word) probability of the formation of a gene given *only* one single piece of information: How many codons are in a gene.

Here, let me refresh your memory:

Since we know that there are only four DNA codons (also called "letters" on this thread), we can calculate the precise probability / improbability of the natural, unaided self-formation of the data for a single gene once we agree upon how many codons are in a gene.

So since you claim to know that it's possible to make a "precise" probability calculation given only this one number (how many codons in a gene), *surely* you must have the calculation at hand.

So let's see it. Now.

Or admit that you were talking out of your rear end.

[Southack]

For me to provide you with an acceptable probability formula, you will have to first state how many codons are in the minimum complexity gene?

Also, nice dodge on your part. Not only did you not provide your own mathematical formula for the probability of genes forming naturally, but you also didn't provide a single example of where the math for this thread was in error.

Nor can you.