Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Monkeys

TRap
Posts: 46
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 3:54:39 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)
NO

Now ask the REAL question.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 4:01:21 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Sorry. Question wording problem. Let me be clear.

This assumption is wrong. = YES
CodingSource
Posts: 350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 4:16:53 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

I think you intended to ask if humans evolved from monkeys. 210th post :)
If computers have no doors or fences, who needs Windows and Gates?

I have a 10-0-0 debate record with an ELO ranking of 2,814. From 610th during my first two-week stay, I am now 326th in the Debates Leaderboard: http://www.debate.org...
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 4:46:43 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The probability of humans evolving form monkeys in your world view is nill, I take it?

But the probability of an intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause is... inevitable, I take it?

Please, go on about odds and averages.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
TRap
Posts: 46
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 5:28:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 4:46:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The probability of humans evolving form monkeys in your world view is nill, I take it?

But the probability of an intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause is... inevitable, I take it?

Please, go on about odds and averages.

OP nowhere states that he believes in an 'intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause' and he doesn't believe in 'probability of humans evolving form monkeys'.

Why are you presuming so much? Being biased is Not good for a healthy debate.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 5:41:14 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

So... We are still waiting for the reveal. What is the big question?
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 5:45:55 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Yes. The concept that DNA can evolve by random mutation alone, are minute.

Unfortunately, the concept that DNA can evolve by systematic selective processes operating on random mutations; is not just not minute, it's inevitable.

The chances of randomly generating a correct 10,000,000 digit pass code is infinitesimally small.

If you have a randomly generated passcode, and create 1000 copies that are slightly different; and then select the one that has most digits matching, then create 1000 copies of that one that are slightly different, then prune, and copy and prune and copy, you will get to the correct 10,000,000 digit pass code remarkably quickly.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 6:12:01 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 5:28:12 PM, TRap wrote:
At 3/5/2016 4:46:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The probability of humans evolving form monkeys in your world view is nill, I take it?

But the probability of an intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause is... inevitable, I take it?

Please, go on about odds and averages.

OP nowhere states that he believes in an 'intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause' and he doesn't believe in 'probability of humans evolving form monkeys'.

Why are you presuming so much? Being biased is Not good for a healthy debate.

True.

But, I like my odds.

So, do, go on.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Leugen9001
Posts: 495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 6:40:09 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Your objections to evolution have already been posted and refuted by other internet users, but I'll still make a refutation of them.

First of all, your ideas about how evolution works are wrong. Evolution is not a purely random process; it is driven by non-random phenomenon like natural selection. As such, your objections to evolution on the virtue that it is purely random are baseless.

Also, you have obviously not seen the fossil record, which, contrary to claims from creationists and out-of-context quotes from scientists, documents that humans did evolve from a primate ancestor. Transitional fossils between humans and primates have been discovered. [1]

Genetic evidence also suggests that humans are, in some way, related to primates, do to the similarity between human and primate genes.

I believe that at least one user has posted similar evidence before I did; the fact that you appear to have refused to address said evidence is evidence that you might not be posting constructively.

[1]http://www.talkorigins.org...
:) nac
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2016 8:40:18 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 6:40:09 PM, Leugen9001 wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Your objections to evolution have already been posted and refuted by other internet users, but I'll still make a refutation of them.

First of all, your ideas about how evolution works are wrong. Evolution is not a purely random process; it is driven by non-random phenomenon like natural selection. As such, your objections to evolution on the virtue that it is purely random are baseless.

Also, you have obviously not seen the fossil record, which, contrary to claims from creationists and out-of-context quotes from scientists, documents that humans did evolve from a primate ancestor. Transitional fossils between humans and primates have been discovered. [1]

Genetic evidence also suggests that humans are, in some way, related to primates, do to the similarity between human and primate genes.

I believe that at least one user has posted similar evidence before I did; the fact that you appear to have refused to address said evidence is evidence that you might not be posting constructively.

[1]http://www.talkorigins.org...

He might be getting somewhere. This time he said " 'random mutation' ".
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 1:52:39 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 4:46:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The probability of humans evolving form monkeys in your world view is nill, I take it?

But the probability of an intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause is... inevitable, I take it?

Please, go on about odds and averages.

A postulated cause that is insufficient to produce an effect and scarce has a very low probability.

A cause that is sufficient and abundantly present has a higher probability.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 1:54:00 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/5/2016 5:45:55 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Yes. The concept that DNA can evolve by random mutation alone, are minute.

Unfortunately, the concept that DNA can evolve by systematic selective processes operating on random mutations; is not just not minute, it's inevitable.

The chances of randomly generating a correct 10,000,000 digit pass code is infinitesimally small.

If you have a randomly generated passcode, and create 1000 copies that are slightly different; and then select the one that has most digits matching, then create 1000 copies of that one that are slightly different, then prune, and copy and prune and copy, you will get to the correct 10,000,000 digit pass code remarkably quickly.

That's a great analogy it implies there is a end-state, a purpose and conclusion that is being sought after in the process.

I had no idea evolution worked that way.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:50:16 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 1:54:00 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/5/2016 5:45:55 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Yes. The concept that DNA can evolve by random mutation alone, are minute.

Unfortunately, the concept that DNA can evolve by systematic selective processes operating on random mutations; is not just not minute, it's inevitable.

The chances of randomly generating a correct 10,000,000 digit pass code is infinitesimally small.

If you have a randomly generated passcode, and create 1000 copies that are slightly different; and then select the one that has most digits matching, then create 1000 copies of that one that are slightly different, then prune, and copy and prune and copy, you will get to the correct 10,000,000 digit pass code remarkably quickly.

That's a great analogy it implies there is a end-state, a purpose and conclusion that is being sought after in the process.

I had no idea evolution worked that way.

Yeesh Mhyk. You sure do have days when your incoherence shines through!

If every part of the analogy applied directly to evolution, rather than just the relevant aspects being compared; randomness vs randomness+selection, then you may have a point.

But we both know it doesn't. That's why it's an analogy, and not a direct explanation of evolutionary processes. Do you understand how analogies work? It seems most ID believers don't seem to understand the basic principles of comparing relevant characterstics; and ignore the relevant characteristics when proposing their own analogies, and do what you do here and raise irrelevant characteristics comparisons to reject those of evolution.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:54:01 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 2:50:16 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/7/2016 1:54:00 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/5/2016 5:45:55 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Yes. The concept that DNA can evolve by random mutation alone, are minute.

Unfortunately, the concept that DNA can evolve by systematic selective processes operating on random mutations; is not just not minute, it's inevitable.

The chances of randomly generating a correct 10,000,000 digit pass code is infinitesimally small.

If you have a randomly generated passcode, and create 1000 copies that are slightly different; and then select the one that has most digits matching, then create 1000 copies of that one that are slightly different, then prune, and copy and prune and copy, you will get to the correct 10,000,000 digit pass code remarkably quickly.

That's a great analogy it implies there is a end-state, a purpose and conclusion that is being sought after in the process.

I had no idea evolution worked that way.

Yeesh Mhyk. You sure do have days when your incoherence shines through!

If every part of the analogy applied directly to evolution, rather than just the relevant aspects being compared; randomness vs randomness+selection, then you may have a point.

But we both know it doesn't. That's why it's an analogy, and not a direct explanation of evolutionary processes. Do you understand how analogies work? It seems most ID believers don't seem to understand the basic principles of comparing relevant characterstics; and ignore the relevant characteristics when proposing their own analogies, and do what you do here and raise irrelevant characteristics comparisons to reject those of evolution.

No I understand analogies break eventually.

Curious could you come up with a better analogy for evolution that is randomness by selection?

Or is evolution it's own unique process without simile?
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 4:03:06 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 2:54:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:50:16 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/7/2016 1:54:00 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/5/2016 5:45:55 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

Yes. The concept that DNA can evolve by random mutation alone, are minute.

Unfortunately, the concept that DNA can evolve by systematic selective processes operating on random mutations; is not just not minute, it's inevitable.

The chances of randomly generating a correct 10,000,000 digit pass code is infinitesimally small.

If you have a randomly generated passcode, and create 1000 copies that are slightly different; and then select the one that has most digits matching, then create 1000 copies of that one that are slightly different, then prune, and copy and prune and copy, you will get to the correct 10,000,000 digit pass code remarkably quickly.

That's a great analogy it implies there is a end-state, a purpose and conclusion that is being sought after in the process.

I had no idea evolution worked that way.

Yeesh Mhyk. You sure do have days when your incoherence shines through!

If every part of the analogy applied directly to evolution, rather than just the relevant aspects being compared; randomness vs randomness+selection, then you may have a point.

But we both know it doesn't. That's why it's an analogy, and not a direct explanation of evolutionary processes. Do you understand how analogies work? It seems most ID believers don't seem to understand the basic principles of comparing relevant characterstics; and ignore the relevant characteristics when proposing their own analogies, and do what you do here and raise irrelevant characteristics comparisons to reject those of evolution.

No I understand analogies break eventually.

Curious could you come up with a better analogy for evolution that is randomness by selection?

Or is evolution it's own unique process without simile?

If you treat evolution as the combination of different processes and what drives them, and reject any analogy that breaks down at any level, then yes it's without simile, because aside from things that evolve, nothing else evolves in the same way. Religion, culture and language have evolved, and the processes at work are very similar, descent with modification even lateral gene transfer, no intent but the comparison tends to break down because these are both directly aspects of humans, and humans change those things. In my analogy, where the analogy breaks down comparing to evolution is intent, and where comparisons to language and religion break down is that the "mutations" are pseudo random but are inventions, rather than changes.

So if you want to demand an ever more accurate analogy of ever great aspects of evolution, at some point you'll get to the point where you can't come up with them; but that's not a big problem. You'd be hard-pushed to do that for any other scientific theory if you hold it to the same criteria of analogy.

If you want to get into a more accurate analogy; I guess you could use planets and asteroids. It is absurd to believe that a significant number of the asteroids in the solar system are in the asteroid belt, and that planets just so happened to form in stable orbits.

The processes that drive planet formation are effectively random motion of a close to homogenous molecular cloud (ish), mediated by gravity. With such a random formation process, one would expect a completely random appearance of asteroids, planets, etc and the chance of something so non random being produced from non-random actions is staggeringly small.

However, when you consider the selection processes at work by gravity and accretion; asteroids outside of those orbits will be thrown out, or accreted by other bodies; that planets in forming in unstable orbital regions will move orbits (because the orbit is unstable) such that either the planet moves into a stable area through gravity, or is accreted by another planet. It's kind of a no brainer.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 5:19:14 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 1:52:39 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/5/2016 4:46:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The probability of humans evolving form monkeys in your world view is nill, I take it?

But the probability of an intangible force with all conceivable power having existed for all time with no cause is... inevitable, I take it?

Please, go on about odds and averages.

A postulated cause that is insufficient to produce an effect and scarce has a very low probability.

Given the context, I can see no difference between ID and random evolution, then.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
slo1
Posts: 4,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 9:08:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

What you assume is random is only random in the sense in that you don't know know all the input variables that effect the outcome. Genetic mutations are not random. There are environmental reasons for a mutation to happen, whether it is dna, epigenitics, or the methylation of dna.

Your anolog of monkeys typing is severely flawed.
autocorrect
Posts: 432
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2016 9:41:51 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
The premise of this argument is flawed. DNA is made up of chemicals with properties that lend themselves to the structure. So randomly generating a 10,000 digit code - or monkeys writing Shakespeare is not relevant; unless - everytime you got the right digit in the right place in the sequence, it was confirmed - and there were other rules like a 2 and a 3 will fit together but a 2 and a 5 will not. Immediately, a 10,000 digit code doesn't seem impossible. It's just a matter of time - and the amount of time available is increased considerably by the fact that astronomers have detected amino acids in gas clouds around stars. In short, the basic chemical associations required to build DNA were coming together before the planet has formed.
chui
Posts: 507
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2016 1:13:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/5/2016 10:46:17 AM, TRap wrote:
Read the whole post first, then you may reply

Probabilities that DNA could evolve by 'random mutation' are so minute as to be utterly laughable"akin to the idea that if you have enough monkeys tapping away on typewriters, one of them will eventually produce a complete masterpiece Shakespearean play.

This assumption is wrong.

Do you agree? ( Then only I can reveal what I intend to ask)

The chance of a water molecule evaporating from the surface of water at boiling point is 1 in 16,000. Thats pretty small and that is only for water molecules that are less than a billionth of a meter from the surface of the water. Deeper molecules have no chance. So by your reasoning water cannot boil.

Probabilities at the molecular level are very different from our every day experience of probability. The odds against winning the lottery seem enormous to us, at the particle level billion to one odds are normal. This is because small particles are so numerous and collide so fast they get billions of chances. If the chance to produce a useful mutation is one in a trillion then they are being produced continually because there are just so many DNA molecules mutating around the world.