[_ Old Earth _] Theistic Evolutionists? Please teach me.

[rmills]

I do not have the time to answer all the questions and statements tonight but I have to dive into something quickly here. Discovering probabilities is my field of expertise. It is funny that you should use the old Hoyle example. I have created Random Number Generator programs to repair IGT mistakes, including card shufflers programs, repair of mistakes that should have been discovered a long time ago. It is hard to compile the actual factors used for probability equations when discussing DNA structure, but what little I have compiled from publications regarding DNA structure produces staggering results. Start with the simple connection between any two items of your choice that are required to build a whatever, take into consideration the environmental requirements, the probabilities of duration, the probabilities of misconnections with unviable items causing interference with the appropriate connections, and we have only begun to scratch the surface of probabilities. I could use analogies that would make your brain pop and they would be examples of simple processes to create simple structures. The fact of the matter is that a 3 bedroom and 2 bath house could have fallen together easier than a life form.

The point I make here is simple. There are a million different ways that creation could have occurred, but due to the blinding complexity of even the simplest life forms, one must conclude from the probabilities that a designer was in charge of the processes. I do not believe that many have a problem with that concept, but the problem is in the understanding all factors involved. I do not believe that any expert on probabilities given the most accurate combination requirements that science has to offer could come close to understanding the factors involved in building one life form. It is a statistical nightmare in itself. My question has always been and will always be as follows:

Why would a creator take the route requiring 10,000,000,000 x 10,000,000,000 x 10,000,000,000 steps (pulled out of the air number) to create a simple life form when it can be done in one step that only infinite wisdom can take? Remember folks, the simplest solution is usually the right solution. This was the case in creating a random slot machine program, a program that by the way was created well after years of failed research with the greatest criminal minds at work.

I watched a video tape of a man who defeated a “random sequence generator†on a poker machine. He did it with a degree in math and a laptop, and he did it to prove that a random generation program could not be created. I and many others proved him wrong. IGT paid the price for their mistake of taking the long route around a simple solution.

I’ll be back.

 

[Quath]

I watched a video tape of a man who defeated a “random sequence generator†on a poker machine. He did it with a degree in math and a laptop, and he did it to prove that a random generation program could not be created. I and many others proved him wrong. IGT paid the price for their mistake of taking the long route around a simple solution.

Our group has made a 64 bit and a 128 bit random number generator. Since we do a lot of random number stuff, we want to make sure we don't get on a repeating cycle. Also, we have to worry about patterns in the lower bits, so we have run tests to make sure that the lower bits have no easy to understand pattern either. It is a tough problem that using the standard random routines doesn't normally address.

The fact of the matter is that a 3 bedroom and 2 bath house could have fallen together easier than a life form.

I think that is a bad comparison. First of all, it is an appeal to the god of the gaps. You can try to say God is in our gaps of knowledge. However, each time that knowledge is discovered, it has the reverse effect of saying that God is less likely to exist. For example, pre-Newton idea of the solar system was that the planets were embeded in a crystal structure that revolved around the Sun. Angels pushed the planets around and the panets moving were proof of angels and God. However, once gravity was discovered and understood, people saw that their belief was partly based on a falsehood. The same thing happened with organic chemistry. Chemistry was divided into organic and inorganic because people thought that spirituality had to play a part of organic chemistry.

Another way to look at this problem is to see that there is great potential for undiscovered simplifications. For example, RNA is more likely to be the original lifeform because it can carry genetic information, replicate and form proteins. These ribozymes are self replicating under certain circumstances. So research here focuses on what the shortest RNA that is self replicating. (Short RNA can naturally form.) There is also research into other molecules that can replicate like polypeptides. There is research into different places life could start such as volcano vents, certain types of clay, stable bubbles, puddles, etc. It is basically a needle in a haystack type of search.

However, all this is really determining is a probability for how far in our universe on average can we expect to see more lifeforms. The worst case is if it is more than the size of the visible universe. Then it would be unlikely we would ever meet aliens.

Quath

 

[Barbarian]

I do not have the time to answer all the questions and statements tonight but I have to dive into something quickly here. Discovering probabilities is my field of expertise. It is funny that you should use the old Hoyle example. I have created Random Number Generator programs to repair IGT mistakes, including card shufflers programs, repair of mistakes that should have been discovered a long time ago. It is hard to compile the actual factors used for probability equations when discussing DNA structure, but what little I have compiled from publications regarding DNA structure produces staggering results.

Indeed. When I was in graduate school, we were using a programmable calcuator (long, long, time ago) to generate random numbers, and we found that there were patterns in the output. One guy on the team found a way to use a clock to make them at least "random enough" so that we couldn't find any patterns.

Start with the simple connection between any two items of your choice that are required to build a whatever, take into consideration the environmental requirements, the probabilities of duration, the probabilities of misconnections with unviable items causing interference with the appropriate connections, and we have only begun to scratch the surface of probabilities. I could use analogies that would make your brain pop and they would be examples of simple processes to create simple structures. The fact of the matter is that a 3 bedroom and 2 bath house could have fallen together easier than a life form.

No, artifacts are staggeringly unlikely, while natural objects have a high probability. For example, a hurricane is a very complex, structured object, fractal down to very small scales where Reynolds numbers finally prevent further detail. And yet they form spontaneously, from nothing more than heat, water, and gravity.

The point I make here is simple. There are a million different ways that creation could have occurred,

More to the point, there are an astronomical number of ways life could have formed.

but due to the blinding complexity of even the simplest life forms, one must conclude from the probabilities that a designer was in charge of the processes.

No more than you must conclude that God was cheating when you shuffled that deck of cards. Each outcome is staggeringly unlikely, yet you get one each time.

My question has always been and will always be as follows:

Why would a creator take the route requiring 10,000,000,000 x 10,000,000,000 x 10,000,000,000 steps (pulled out of the air number) to create a simple life form when it can be done in one step that only infinite wisdom can take?

Why would the genome be so staggeringly complex? Couldn't he have created a universe in which humans were just one substance, without all that detail of uncounted millions of different kinds of molecules? I'm certain He could have done that. He could have compressed all things into an instant, if He chose. However, we can observe that He did not.

I can only conclude that He did not for good reasons.

Remember folks, the simplest solution is usually the right solution.

It is for us. But apparently, God works differently. The universe, although it may work by only a few very simple rules, is an astonishingly complex place.

If God was aiming at simplicity, He missed.

 

[victorhadin]

Quath and Barbarian: Cheers. I don't often float by here nowadays, but every now and again I take a peek. You guys are an education in yourselves.

 

[Barbarian]

Thanks for the kind words. : Where are you hanging out these days?

 

[Wertbag]

One thing to remember when talking about the creation of life is that it is a parallel event and not sequential. Its not the attempt to create life at one point, but an entire planet of locations.
One of the descriptions that I always liked was the lottery. Say the basic chance to win is one in a billion, so you'd have to conclude its incredibly unlikely to win. Now go out and buy a million different tickets, suddenly its 1 in a thousand, and you start to see that the chances aren't as bad as they seem.
If we go with the idea that life required alot of energy (probably lightning strike or some such) then think how many lightning strikes are there world wide in a year? Then take the long periods that are shown for the earth, how many lightning strikes in a thousand years, or a million?
Life in one try would be hard, life in billions of attempts over billions of years doesn't sound anywhere near as improbable.

 

[ThinkerMan]

Great post Wertbag.

As for that one lightning strike, here is a map of the strikes in the United States over just the last two hours....as of right now it says 31,000.

That's a lot of lottery tickets.....

http://www.lightningstorm.com/tux/jsp/g ... y_free.jsp

 

[Wertbag]

What an amazing site, never realised just how many strikes there were (I thought hundreds maybe thousands a day, but tens of thousands every few hours is a massive amount of energy transfer).

 

[Guest]

Most of the Old Earth research was done by Christians. They sought many ways to explain how science and religion could both be right. Some came up with the idea of many creations. Some by redefining words in Genesis. Some just accepted it and just figured it would all be reconciled later.

Quath

:B-fly: Knowing this,why would it be a surprize to you that evolution is
and always was part of pagan religions. History proves it,and this should
help you confirm that in your mind more clearly.

 

[victorhadin]

Thanks for the kind words. : Where are you hanging out these days?

Around and about. Skipping over this big internetty thing like a waterskiing insect, generally.

 

[rmills]

Sorry, slow to respond.

I have read some curious analogies here.

One of the descriptions that I always liked was the lottery. Say the basic chance to win is one in a billion, so you'd have to conclude its incredibly unlikely to win. Now go out and buy a million different tickets, suddenly its 1 in a thousand, and you start to see that the chances aren't as bad as they seem.
If we go with the idea that life required alot of energy (probably lightning strike or some such) then think how many lightning strikes are there world wide in a year? Then take the long periods that are shown for the earth, how many lightning strikes in a thousand years, or a million?
Life in one try would be hard, life in billions of attempts over billions of years doesn't sound anywhere near as improbable.

Probability in this context is way off. What about the plants? What about the birds? Forget the humans, what about everything else classified as a biologic? The improbabilities are horrid enough when it comes to humans but what about the Elephant? The Daisy? The Redwood? The Aliens? I don’t know that any of this would ever come close to working in even the context of billions of years, unless…

Now we all know that stem cell research and genetic engineering are on the forefront of these arguments. We all eagerly await the next finding to hit the presses and show us all that there really is no need for a common designer, a God, or whatever we wish to claim we don’t need. Here is the problem. This is all like tracing a Picasso and calling the end result a full understanding of the mind of the painter. Then we paint our own painting with our new found understanding of Picasso and close out the painting by signing it Picasso. We know now that we are capable of being Picasso, so who needs the guy?

We can genetically engineer a fly that withstands colder temperatures. And the point is? The point from an Atheistic Evolutionist may be, “Who needs God? We have just proven that Evolution works! Look at this fly!†All that this proves is that a Genetic Engineer can manipulate fly genes in a controlled environment to withstand colder temperatures than its mama fly.

What if we can grow a new heart for the poor kid born with a whole in their heart? Cool! What does this prove other than science’s ability to trace the painting? What does this prove other than our ability to replicate an already prepared design?

but due to the blinding complexity of even the simplest life forms, one must conclude from the probabilities that a designer was in charge of the processes.

No more than you must conclude that God was cheating when you shuffled that deck of cards. Each outcome is staggeringly unlikely, yet you get one each time.

What if you are in a Texas Hold-Em’ poker game and the objective of the game is to hit the bad beat?
Now I have looked into this in a local casino, just to find out the hard facts in this game. You have 10 players and a dealer. To hit the bad beat, you need three top winning “miracle hands†as players call them, two players hands combined with the dealers hand. You have one deck of cards. The typical stats that this casino reports are one bad beat per every average 439,460 hands. Now that just for 52 cards dealt 2 each to 10 players, and 5 community cards. So to have nine cards deal out on the table in the perfect sequence to make a bad beat, a single table in a room of 20 or so tables stands the chance of flopping out a bad beat about once a year depending on how long the table is played each day, but in this example, about 14 hours a day.

What does 9 cards equate to in light of what must come together in the beginning of a previously non-existent life form? Nothing. Further, to say that there are billions of lightning strikes out there to create better odds doesn’t register with me because that is one variable in countless variables that must exist for life from a mud puddle (containing countless variables in itself) to even begin to look like it might work.

I am getting a headache so I will have to continue later, but good discussion so far!