Evolution is a hoax

[BADecker]

Probability and Statistical Impossibility

But, as we came to learn more about the universe and about the miracle of life, science realized that the necessary components of life were not that simple. Sagan's original estimate of two necessary conditions was eventually raised to 10; a later revision in light of further discoveries stated there were 20 necessary conditions. By the turn of the 21st century, scientific advances had now set the number of necessary conditions for life at around 50, which of course drastically reduces the amount of potentially life-supporting planets in the universe. The one septillion potentially life-supporting planets of 1966 had by 2000 been reduced to only a few thousand. And with each discovery about the universe or biological life, those numbers are constantly being revised, further raising the number of conditions and reducing the amount of planets capable of supporting life.

By 2006, the estimates of the necessary conditions for life had risen so high that a representative of the SETI project wrote in the Skeptical Inquirer an article abjectly admitting that all earlier estimates of the statistical likelihood of finding extraterrestrial life "may no longer be tenable" and that expectations about finding a planet that could support life should be put to rest. [2]

In fact, as further conditions for supporting life continued to be discovered, the mathematical probability of there being any planets able to support life dropped to zero. The odds were against any planet supporting life - even this one. Today the list of parameters necessary to support life is around 200 and will probably keep growing in the near future.  As Metaxas says, "The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing" [3].

Evolution is a hoax.

That's just a classic argument from fine tuning, debunked many times. regardless of the supposed odds, if they were really so unachievable, we wouldn’t be here contemplating the “miracle” of existence. It contradicts a previous creationist idea that the entire universe was created by a wise god to be fine-tuned FOR the human race (You said this plenty of the times in the other thread, how the universe was so perfect and blabla), but it seems the only location nearby Earth on which a human can survive is... none.
Moreover, no matter how unlikely an event is, once it occurs, the probability of it having happened is 1.

And maybe.. just maybe you only find this false information on creationists sites because, maybe... just maybe, they are against evolution. Who knows...

Your so-called debunking isn't debunking. It's just talk that doesn't have anything to back it up. That kind of debunking talk only debunks itself.

Nice copy paste, look I can do it too.
Your so-called argument isn't an argument. It's just talk that doesn't have anything to back it up. That kind of argument that only debunks itself.

But I showed a website that was backed up with references that are reasonably common knowledge. All you did was debunk yourself.

So what? Just because it posts a bunch of references doesn't mean it's true. I can post counter references to the references there too:

http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/

http://answers-in-reason.com/religion/mathematical-impossibility-evolution-debunked/

Means I'm right now.

Neither of your sites shows any proof for evolution. Nobody has ever seen evolution happening that they can prove is evolution. In fact, all the so-called evidences fit creation better. You sites debunk themselves, besides having nothing to do with the site that I linked above - http://unamsanctamcatholicam.com/apologetics/84-contra-atheism/512-probability-statistical-impossibility.html.

Evolution is impossible, partly because science shows that life is impossible... except for the fact that life exists.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

Probability and Statistical Impossibility

But, as we came to learn more about the universe and about the miracle of life, science realized that the necessary components of life were not that simple. Sagan's original estimate of two necessary conditions was eventually raised to 10; a later revision in light of further discoveries stated there were 20 necessary conditions. By the turn of the 21st century, scientific advances had now set the number of necessary conditions for life at around 50, which of course drastically reduces the amount of potentially life-supporting planets in the universe. The one septillion potentially life-supporting planets of 1966 had by 2000 been reduced to only a few thousand. And with each discovery about the universe or biological life, those numbers are constantly being revised, further raising the number of conditions and reducing the amount of planets capable of supporting life.

By 2006, the estimates of the necessary conditions for life had risen so high that a representative of the SETI project wrote in the Skeptical Inquirer an article abjectly admitting that all earlier estimates of the statistical likelihood of finding extraterrestrial life "may no longer be tenable" and that expectations about finding a planet that could support life should be put to rest. [2]

In fact, as further conditions for supporting life continued to be discovered, the mathematical probability of there being any planets able to support life dropped to zero. The odds were against any planet supporting life - even this one. Today the list of parameters necessary to support life is around 200 and will probably keep growing in the near future.  As Metaxas says, "The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing" [3].

Evolution is a hoax.

That's just a classic argument from fine tuning, debunked many times. regardless of the supposed odds, if they were really so unachievable, we wouldn’t be here contemplating the “miracle” of existence. It contradicts a previous creationist idea that the entire universe was created by a wise god to be fine-tuned FOR the human race (You said this plenty of the times in the other thread, how the universe was so perfect and blabla), but it seems the only location nearby Earth on which a human can survive is... none.
Moreover, no matter how unlikely an event is, once it occurs, the probability of it having happened is 1.

And maybe.. just maybe you only find this false information on creationists sites because, maybe... just maybe, they are against evolution. Who knows...

Your so-called debunking isn't debunking. It's just talk that doesn't have anything to back it up. That kind of debunking talk only debunks itself.

Nice copy paste, look I can do it too.
Your so-called argument isn't an argument. It's just talk that doesn't have anything to back it up. That kind of argument that only debunks itself.

But I showed a website that was backed up with references that are reasonably common knowledge. All you did was debunk yourself.

So what? Just because it posts a bunch of references doesn't mean it's true. I can post counter references to the references there too:

http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/

http://answers-in-reason.com/religion/mathematical-impossibility-evolution-debunked/

Means I'm right now.

Neither of your sites shows any proof for evolution. Nobody has ever seen evolution happening that they can prove is evolution. In fact, all the so-called evidences fit creation better. You sites debunk themselves, besides having nothing to do with the site that I linked above - http://unamsanctamcatholicam.com/apologetics/84-contra-atheism/512-probability-statistical-impossibility.html.

Evolution is impossible, partly because science shows that life is impossible... except for the fact that life exists.

Evolution is a hoax.

Your site linked above debunks itself, it doesn't prove evolution is impossible. We have seen evolution in the peppered moth or the Live Birth in Three-toed Skinks.
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

https://www.thoughtco.com/how-evolution-has-been-observed-249896

[BADecker]

Your site linked above debunks itself, it doesn't prove evolution is impossible. We have seen evolution in the peppered moth or the Live Birth in Three-toed Skinks.
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

https://www.thoughtco.com/how-evolution-has-been-observed-249896

Say, thanks for the nice examples of complex cause and effect in action. If you want to call programmed C&E activity evolution, that's entirely up to you, of course. But it is in no way evolution as evolution scientists interpret evolution. And it isn't any greater than breeding, although it may be a little different. No proof of evolution in them.

Evolution is a hoax.

[2ballsfrog]

You do not believe in science manuals but believe a collection of letters from 2000 years ago?

[C10H15N]

Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?

Because you don't understand evolution. 

[krky]

Of course it is, all of them were nothing but theories. "Science is always wrong, it never solves a problem without creating 10 more" -George Bernard Shaw.

[Astargath]

Your site linked above debunks itself, it doesn't prove evolution is impossible. We have seen evolution in the peppered moth or the Live Birth in Three-toed Skinks.
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

https://www.thoughtco.com/how-evolution-has-been-observed-249896

Say, thanks for the nice examples of complex cause and effect in action. If you want to call programmed C&E activity evolution, that's entirely up to you, of course. But it is in no way evolution as evolution scientists interpret evolution. And it isn't any greater than breeding, although it may be a little different. No proof of evolution in them.

Evolution is a hoax.

If you want to keep claiming that everything has a cause, you can but it wont make you right. You said that science supports this, yet you never shown a single scientist or a science field that says everything has a cause.
Badecker is a liar, he will often ignore past comments to fuel his delusion. What you are writing here is a hoax too because it has a cause.

[popcorn1]

Causality (also referred to as causation,[1] or cause and effect) is the natural or worldly agency or efficacy that connects one process (the cause) with another process or state (the effect), where the first is partly responsible for the second, and the second is partly dependent on the first. In general, a process has many causes, which are said to be causal factors for it, and all lie in its past. An effect can in turn be a cause of, or causal factor for, many other effects, which all lie in its future. Causality is metaphysically prior to notions of time and space.[2][3]

Causality is an abstraction that indicates how the world progresses, so basic a concept that it is more apt as an explanation of other concepts of progression than as something to be explained by others more basic. The concept is like those of agency and efficacy. For this reason, a leap of intuition may be needed to grasp it.[4] Accordingly, causality is implicit in the logic and structure of ordinary language.[5]

In Aristotelian philosophy, the word 'cause' is also used to mean 'explanation' or 'answer to a why question', including Aristotle's material, formal, efficient, and final "causes"; then the "cause" is the explanans for the explanandum. In this case, failure to recognize that different kinds of "cause" are being considered can lead to futile debate. Of Aristotle's four explanatory modes, the one nearest to the concerns of the present article is the "efficient" one.

[popcorn1]

Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE

Hahahaha, the same question I thought so? why would there be monkeys? I don't believe it either. But I do believe in the creator creating versions, not evolution. So if you are the creator and think there is a better way of making something i think you would have thoughts of redesigning it. And then trying to compare later if such a thing is better than the other. Then maybe opt for another if the other two doesn't satisfy you. Evolution for me is just a hoax. We would have change by now. Perhaps we should have looked even more handsome and beautiful or maybe the other way around. Like having our eyes bigger than our body, hands bigger than our feet, or better still we have antennas so that there is no need for cellphones. No radiations then.

Evolution for me is just a hoax. We would have change by now.

But but we have changed..

We evolved to have a brain fingers and to communicate so that means we evolved to make technology
and as you well know one day we will see half man half robot  ..

Maybe a brain and a robot and live for 2 thousand years  ..
So to say we as humans haven't evolved is a complete joke..

Why do you think we got brains and fingers YES to make shit  ..

I know it's to spread amongst the stars like a human seed ..

We evolved to make technology to go vast distances to spread our human seed..
Thus spreading our earth ..The earth lives on too ..

[Vod]

We see proof of evolution everyday (what BD called "change").

Notice how the average height of people have increased over the last HUNDRED years?

Both men and women are attracted to taller people.  This leads to sex, which leads to taller people being born.

That is evolution - no matter what anyone calls it. 

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence! 

[BADecker]

Your site linked above debunks itself, it doesn't prove evolution is impossible. We have seen evolution in the peppered moth or the Live Birth in Three-toed Skinks.
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

https://www.thoughtco.com/how-evolution-has-been-observed-249896

Say, thanks for the nice examples of complex cause and effect in action. If you want to call programmed C&E activity evolution, that's entirely up to you, of course. But it is in no way evolution as evolution scientists interpret evolution. And it isn't any greater than breeding, although it may be a little different. No proof of evolution in them.

Evolution is a hoax.

If you want to keep claiming that everything has a cause, you can but it wont make you right. You said that science supports this, yet you never shown a single scientist or a science field that says everything has a cause.
Badecker is a liar, he will often ignore past comments to fuel his delusion. What you are writing here is a hoax too because it has a cause.

Consider the blockchain. We are using 26 uppercase letters, + 26 lower case letters, +10 numbers. We are combining them at random into, what is it(?), 34 random character strings... or larger. Yet the odds of cracking a bitcoin password or hash via brute force would take thousands and thousands of years.

Now, arrange all the atoms necessary for life into the exact proper position and kick-start them into motion in just the right way to produce life. The improbability of this happening once is beyond impossible, partly because there are multitudes more atoms and molecules in a living cell, to say nothing about the forces necessary for the precise kick start, than the 26+26+10 used in a blockchain, that evolution is impossible to happen by any method we can start to dream of.

And then on top of that, there would have to be multiples of atoms and electrons plopping into place over the eons, adding more complexity to the probability/impossibility than ever, just for mutations to be beneficial.

If evolution were to happen by any random method, it would take a universe billions of times older than the 13.5 billion years attributed to our universe. The blockchain is proving that evolution is impossible.

We might say, "Well this or that might have happened to make evolution probable." But saying such is simply drawing at straws, and a gigantically large number of straws, at that. In other words, evolution is all guesswork.

All the grubbing around in the dirt for skeletons from the past is simply a method for evolutionists to make money.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Vod]

If evolution were to happen by any random method, it would take a universe billions of times older than the 13.5 billion years attributed to our universe.

Evolution is not random - it is the furthest thing possible from random. 

Yes, DNA gets mutated by some random act and that causes the new generation to evolve.

But whether that next generation survives or not (producing evolution) is determined by the advantages the new generation has.  If the mutation produced a disadvantage, then that DNA line would die off.    I don't expect you to understand BD, but that's how life works.

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

[BADecker]

If evolution were to happen by any random method, it would take a universe billions of times older than the 13.5 billion years attributed to our universe.

Evolution is not random - it is the furthest thing possible from random.  

Yes, DNA gets mutated by some random act and that causes the new generation to evolve.

But whether that next generation survives or not (producing evolution) is determined by the advantages the new generation has.  If the mutation produced a disadvantage, then that DNA line would die off.    I don't expect you to understand BD, but that's how life works.

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

If evolution is not random, then why are the evolutionists talking about it being random? I mean, if it is natural selection, then nature is selecting to make life and advance it way beyond anything we can do in the lab by trying to do it. If we could do it in the lab, the researchers would have fixed themselves so that they could live 200 years by now. This means that nature is way smarter than we are, by billions of times. You are starting to talk God here.



EDIT: Poor Jennifer Lawrence!

[BADecker]

The largest prime number ever discovered is 23 million digits long

It's been dubbed M77232917 – and if you're wondering why it needs a codename, well, we'd be here all day typing out the 23 million digits that make it up.

If it's been a while since high school math class, here's a quick refresher: Prime numbers are those that are only divisible by 1 and themselves. Small primes are fairly easy to identify through trial and error – 6 can be divided by 2 and 3, so it isn't prime, but 7 is – but as you look at larger and larger numbers it gets less obvious. It might take you a while to figure out, for example, that 11,319,033 isn't prime because it can be divided by 213 and 53,141. Finding the really large primes is a task best left up to computers running software like GIMPS.

As the MP in its acronym suggests, GIMPS is specifically searching for a rare class of prime numbers called Mersenne Primes. These are numbers that are one less than a power of 2, expressed as Mn = 2n - 1. That means that the newcomer M77232917 is calculated through a chain of 77,232,917 twos, and then subtracting 1. It's only the 50th known Mersenne Prime ever identified, and it's made up of 23,249,425 digits.

Read more at https://newatlas.com/largest-prime-number-discovered/52870/.





And I thought the odds against evolution were big before.     

[Vod]

If evolution is not random, then why are the evolutionists talking about it being random?

Honestly, who cares what the voices in your head tell you?  Sometimes you just need to blindly believe what seven billion people are telling you. 

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

[turagsoy123456]

Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE

This is a good topic to be discuss.. And have something get confusing about this.. Why everything you've been told is wrong.. What if darwin theory of natural selection is in accurate..what if the way you live now affects the life of expectancy of your descindants .because evolutionary thingking is having a evolution.

[BADecker]

If evolution is not random, then why are the evolutionists talking about it being random?

Honestly, who cares what the voices in your head tell you?  Sometimes you just need to blindly believe what seven billion people are telling you. 

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

Don't worry. You will have lots of friends in your evolution religion for a long time.

[Vod]

Don't worry. You will have lots of friends in your evolution religion for a long time.

Evolution doesn't have beliefs and practices - isn't a religion.

Another example of something you have been told many many times.  But again, DENSE. 

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

[BADecker]

Don't worry. You will have lots of friends in your evolution religion for a long time.

Evolution doesn't have beliefs and practices - isn't a religion.

Another example of something you have been told many many times.  But again, DENSE.  

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!

All religious people think like that about their religion. You still are important, however, even though you are dragging the importance of Jennifer Lawrence down.

[Vod]

All religious people think like that about their religion.

Christians are very proud of their beliefs and practices.  So is every other religion on the planet.

Evolutionists don't have beliefs and practices.  Evolution is reality - which is the opposite of religion. 

I'm married to Jennifer Lawrence!