Radiometric dating is a complex process complicated by Dirty sex talk chatroom online

In calculating the probability for a mutation, one must consider not merely the probability that the mutation will arise, but the number of opportunities for that mutation.

So if a mutation has only a one-in-a-million chance of happening, it's still very likely that the mutation will eventually occur if the species has millions of members.

You just get blown away by these things, they are just so amazingly complicated. Therefore; design." You've heard it all now — that's the root of their argument.

Most evolutionary biologists do not consider it science by any stretch of the imagination because the idea relies on personal incredulity and unwarranted assumptions.

However, a full explanation of this is beyond the scope of this article.

While surrounded by some fancy words and the language of science, this is just incredulity that the world could arise through naturalistic processes.

And did you know that cells are really, really complicated? Specifically, it argues that if you take a part away from an organism and it stops functioning (analogous to taking the engine out of a car) then it must be irreducibly complex and cannot have evolved.

And you're gonna be blown away by the bacterial flagellum — it's like a little machine! Irreducible complexity stems from the claim that some biological systems appear to be too complex to have arisen by natural selection.

So now the question arises: if there are several different mutations under consideration, do we multiply all the probabilities together, and then compare the probability to the number of opportunities, or do we compare each probability to the number of opportunities, and then multiply the adjusted probabilities together?

Evolutionary theory (and mathematical probability theory) tell us that we should do the latter; each mutation can arise independently, spread through the population by natural selection, and combine through sexual reproduction (or gene transfer in simpler organisms).

(And if they did, they could be produced by random mutation.) Moreover, nobody would assume that the watch had simply been summoned into existence by some mystery force; they would not only assume a watchmaker, but a whole history of work in associated technologies by hundreds if not thousands of individuals.

Oddly, no ID advocate has ever argued that the "designer" is a giant committee of unrelated inventors.

The above arguments appeal to the common sense of the "Average Joe".

Tags: , ,