Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,649 Year: 4,906/9,624 Month: 254/427 Week: 0/64 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolutionists improbable becoming probable argument
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


(3)
Message 26 of 98 (907748)
02-28-2023 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by sensei
02-27-2023 7:55 PM


quote:
If anybody is not understanding probability, it's evolutionists. Do the math and evolutionists are playing a losing game.
Really? Let’s see you do the math.
First formulate your argument. If that is valid we can identify the correct calculation. When you’ve got that right, you can do the math.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by sensei, posted 02-27-2023 7:55 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by sensei, posted 02-28-2023 1:03 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 44 of 98 (907793)
02-28-2023 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by sensei
02-28-2023 1:03 PM


quote:
You are way behind. Try to keep up.
And yet I am still ahead of you. You haven’t produced anything like a valid argument in this thread, let alone got to doing the math.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by sensei, posted 02-28-2023 1:03 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by sensei, posted 02-28-2023 1:26 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 47 of 98 (907798)
02-28-2023 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by sensei
02-28-2023 1:26 PM


quote:
And what have you produced?
A challenge that you seem incapable of meeting - despite your confident assertion.
quote:
Easy to ignore what you don't understand, isn't it?
I don’t find it to be so, but you seem to.
quote:
You should learn about probability space. Then read again what I wrote
I’m sure that I know at least as much as you. Enough to see that you haven’t produced any argument that could even lead to relevant calculations.
Are you going to try? Or are you just going to stick with empty bluster?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by sensei, posted 02-28-2023 1:26 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 3:32 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 54 of 98 (907844)
03-01-2023 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by sensei
03-01-2023 3:32 AM


quote:
Empty claims from the arrogant evolutionist who produced not a single useful argument.
Of course, all I am doing is seeing if you can back up your claims with something more than arrogant bluster.
You talk about probability spaces, but you haven’t defined one, let alone a relevant probability space. So we still haven’t seen any relevant math from you at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 3:32 AM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 4:18 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 56 of 98 (907848)
03-01-2023 4:44 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by sensei
03-01-2023 4:18 AM


quote:
I done so multiple times
No, you have not. You haven’t clearly defined even one of the three parameters of a probability space.
quote:
Your ignorance and amateuristic level is your problem.
The problem is your “ignorance and amateuristic level” - and that is not my problem at all. If you actually manage to define a probability space you will find that I am quite able to discuss it. And it’s relevance to the question of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 4:18 AM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 6:51 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


(3)
Message 58 of 98 (907854)
03-01-2023 7:29 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by sensei
03-01-2023 6:51 AM


quote:
I specified the length of gene sequences to be a few hundred upto 2 million. What part of that do you not understand? In other examples, I specified lengths as well.
And? Even if that is going to be your sample space - and I think it a bad choice - there are still the event space and the probability function to define,
To explain why gene sequence is a bad choice for sample space, consider this: Why would specific gene sequences matter? Surely the issue is what they do - and that is dependent on the context provided by other genes and the environment, and can be realised in multiple different sequences. Dembski’s concept of specification may be flawed but it is far better than looking at raw events as others have pointed out,
quote:
Do you know which bases a gene consists of? Do you need people to spell everything out for you?
I need you to explain your argument - since you seem incredibly reluctant to actually do it - and if it involves a probability space you need to define that - which you still haven’t come close to doing.
quote:
So no, you are not capable of discussing these things you so poorly understand.
Apparently I understand them better than you, and that is another problem for you. You can’t baffle me with bullshit if I know enough to see that you are bullshitting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 6:51 AM sensei has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 64 of 98 (907892)
03-01-2023 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Taq
03-01-2023 11:09 AM


quote:
If we saw that existing books fit into a nested hierarchy we would suspect that they share a common ancestor. We could also watch books reproduce, and see what pattern of substitutions occur in each generation.
To an extent that is the case - manuscripts copied by hand are an example of imperfect reproduction. I don’t think we see anything like as good a nested hierarchy as in the case of life, but an element of it is there.
Related to that is the use of deliberate errors to detect plagiarism, in maps, for instance. That might be compared to the evidence from ERVs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Taq, posted 03-01-2023 11:09 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 03-01-2023 4:39 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 69 of 98 (907908)
03-01-2023 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Taq
03-01-2023 4:39 PM


quote:
If each manuscript was copied from the previous copy it could be possible to trace ancestry and reconstruct the original, given there are enough branching lineages. In the same way, it is possible to reconstruct much of the ape common ancestral genome by comparing the genomes of humans, chimps, gorillas, and orangutans (and gibbons if you want to include them)
If. I believe that what we can do is quite limited. There was continuous copying - because books wear out. And hand-copied books are nowhere as numerous as living creatures.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 03-01-2023 4:39 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Taq, posted 03-01-2023 5:15 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17838
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 73 of 98 (907915)
03-02-2023 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Taq
03-01-2023 5:15 PM


Ah, but the effort of copying largely stopped when printing came in. Everyday copying became completely unnecessary when a printed replacement could be obtained.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Taq, posted 03-01-2023 5:15 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Tanypteryx, posted 03-02-2023 12:45 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024