Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Southack
I've identified a problem :

then the math shows that it can not happen randomly in 17 Billion years of trying. The sequencing of any data over that size must be done by a non-natural process, per the math in said proof.

How do you justify getting from 'cannot happen randomly' to 'non-natural'? It seems to me a more logical conclusion would be 'the natural process wasn't random in the way Watson described'.

348 posted on 03/08/2002 1:56:38 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies ]


To: Virginia-American
"How do you justify getting from 'cannot happen randomly' to 'non-natural'? It seems to me a more logical conclusion would be 'the natural process wasn't random in the way Watson described'." - Virginia-American

If you'll review the content of the posts in this thread, you might catch that I've already agreed that the math can be interpreted as saying that Life formed from a non-random process.

350 posted on 03/08/2002 2:03:59 PM PST by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson