Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/0 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Evolutionists improbable becoming probable argument
mike the wiz
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003

Message 1 of 98 (907196)
02-19-2023 8:12 AM

Evolutionists have classically argued that if something is not a matter of being intrinsically impossible that therefore it's a matter of probability and that no matter how improbable eventually the event will become probable. (A classic argument from probability) (given the numbers and time are there, OBVIOUSLY. Why should I say things that go without saying? To counter the trolls that look for you missing things! I don't miss them, I just don't type every thought out do I? Obvious really isn't it?)
However I question the conditional premise that, "if something is improbable eventually it will become probable given enough time and numbers".
Imagine there is a commode. It has a bucket underneath. It is locked so the chair can't be moved away from it. The bucket is sealed. Above it (for the sake of pretending) there is an ornament on a shelf. This is in a forest. The commode is made of brittle wooden material that rots real quick. 
There is a padlock so the bucket can't be opened. It has a four digit pin. The chances of guessing it are 1 in 10,000. But also you must tap in the four digits within three seconds or the padlock will not open. Then you have to tap in another correct pin of again four digits, again within three seconds. 1 in 100 million.
What (specifically) are the chances of the pin being typed in randomly by some cause, whatever it is, and the ornament falling into the bucket once the bucket is loosed, again randomly? 
Is it possible? Yes, it is not intrinsically impossible because there is nothing in physics preventing the scenario from happening. 
The numbers are so large that basically the specifically stated scenario, will not ever happen. 
Objection; it may happen given enough time and numbers.
Counter objection; the commode frame is made from brittle wooden material and will decay and collapse before that amount of time or numbers passes.
You object; then it's impossible. 
Counter objection; no, it is not intrinsically impossible because physics doesn't prevent the scenario. It is possible to punch in the pins, and it is possible for the ornament to fall in the bucket, for all you need is the force necessary. It is not impossible in the sense of a square also being a circle or a six foot man being two foot at the same time as being six foot. (please dispense with the smart-ass pedantic equivocations such as, "maybe he's bent over in a chinese dragon costume". Sorry, just won't ever be impressed with transparent, predictable pseudo-retorts but one thing they do achieve is boring the dung out of me because I see them coming three miles away.)
The scenario is possible, and yet here is the point; even if it is improbable, it will not follow that it will become more probable. It is more probable the commode will rot. (it is guaranteed it will rot under the usual circumstances)
 Much, much, much, much more probable. The kind of difference between comparing the chances of you winning the lottery jackpot five consecutive times and the chances of NOT winning it five consecutive times. No rational person would believe that the chances are even comparable given the gulf is so vast. It's 1 in 1 versus 1 in a bazillion. (I know it's not really 1 in 1. YAWN!!!!!)
Conclusion; improbable things, superbly improbable things, are more to be equated with FALSE things, when they reach a stage whereby more probable things will simply always prevent the chain from occurring because reality simply makes those things so probable as to be almost guaranteed such as the sun rising tomorrow. 
Abiogenesis is one of those unreal things. Ergo, it reasonably didn't happen, ergo evolution reasonably didn't happen. 
Imagine you had to get a heads on a coin toss one billion billion times consecutively. More probable events would be so much more abundant that even calling it an "improbability" only works in theory, not in practice. It's only really a technicality to call it improbable, in a practical way it's more that it's impossible even if not technically impossible. Perhaps we can call this, "reasonably impossible". 
Remember, this example can't become more probable over time, for the commode would rot within say two years and even if a person was guessing the two consecutive combinations it might take them much longer but we are not including attempts to unlock it in terms of representing teleology since arguments for abiogenesis don't include intelligent agents.
This 100% proves you can have an improbable event NOT become more probable and to assume that you would have to REMOVE all abundantly probable things that stop that event from occurring. In other words; UNREALITY. In that sense some things are so staggeringly improbable it's more reasonable to call them, "false" or, "unreal" because we innately know reality simply won't allow them to occur.
Some things are so staggeringly improbable they're as good as impossible. How close to "0" do you need to get? How long does the "0.00000000001" have to be?
For example will there ever be born a man that wants to run for the presidency of the united states of America because he doesn't like the fact that Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley are living lesbians that live on pluto? Is that far enough up the 0.0000000001 scale? 
Then let us further ask, what are the chances of him also being a professional golfer that has hole-in-ones for every single three par he has ever played?
Think about how many things in the real world would have to not happen. A wrong bounce of the ball sending it off course so it misses the hole, a gust of wind never moving it from it's trajectory.
Just admit that the thoughts of such "improbable" things happening is a fairytale notion that doesn't belong to the real world.
Conclusion; Very greatly improbable things aren't really improbable if they can only theoretically happen but the real world would never enable them to occur. The commode analogy is a good example of something which is not impossible, nor is it really improbable, in that it's better described as simply an guaranteed-to-be-unreal, hypothetical scenario. 
You can invent many such hypothetic scenarios that are way, way, way more fantastical. Abiogenesis is certainly a good example of one of the most fantastical examples of this. 

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nwr, posted 02-20-2023 9:03 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 4 by Percy, posted 02-20-2023 10:13 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 5 by AZPaul3, posted 02-20-2023 1:42 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 6 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-20-2023 2:45 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 12 by Stile, posted 02-21-2023 9:11 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 13 by Taq, posted 02-21-2023 10:57 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 71 by Parasomnium, posted 03-01-2023 6:14 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 75 by Parasomnium, posted 03-02-2023 1:31 AM mike the wiz 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