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

To: Southack
Just to be clear, the math proof for this thread does not deal with an instantaneous formation of data, but rather with the formation of data in the proper sequence over time.

Typically, you are misunderstanding what it is about. The math deals with instantaneous format of DNA, NOT because it happens in a fraction of a second but because it is talking about a single molecule that is formed in one process.

The objections pointing out this isn't how it would happen aren't objecting to it taking some time to do, they are objecting to the idea that the entire molecule would be formed in one operation.

You still haven't dealt with the other issues brought up. Why don't you address those? Why don't you acknowledge that this mathematical excercise is meaningless, as is implied when you admit it applies to a random process? Why don't you correct yourself?

367 posted on 03/09/2002 9:48:48 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies ]


To: mlo
"Typically, you are misunderstanding what it is about. The math deals with instantaneous format of DNA, NOT because it happens in a fraction of a second but because it is talking about a single molecule that is formed in one process."

No, you are incorrect. Each monkey in the analogy types letters one at a time for years, rather than typing all of its output simultaneously as you claim.

Thus, the math deals with the sequence of data, not with instantaneous data.

369 posted on 03/09/2002 9:58:41 AM PST by Southack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | 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