Send a Tweet
- Advertisement -
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 4 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Sci Tech   

Do probability arguments refute evolution?

Quicklink Submitted By     (# of views)   3 comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Don Smith
Become a Fan
  (23 fans)

Both traditional creationists and intelligent design writers have invoked probability arguments in criticisms of biological evolution. They argue that certain features of biology are so fantastically improbable that they could never have been produced by a purely natural, “random” process, even assuming the billions of years of history asserted by geologists and astronomers.  But a closer examination of the science shows that the creationists make unwarranted assumptions and ignore fundamental features of evolution.

Evolution!
Evolution!
(Image by Samuel Rivas)
  Details   DMCA

Read the rest of the story HERE:

At mathscholar.org

 

- Advertisement -

Rate It | View Ratings

Don Smith Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

DFA organizer, Democratic Precinct Committee Officer, writer, and programmer. My op-ed pieces have appeared in the Seattle Times, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, and elsewhere. See http://WALiberals.org and http://TruthSite.org for my writing, my (more...)
 
Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Comments Image Post Quicklink Comment and Rate This Quicklink

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
          

Comment Here:   



You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.
Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 
Username
Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

3 people are discussing this page, with 3 comments  Post Comment


Peter Duveen

Become a Fan
Author 20762

(Member since Aug 30, 2008), 28 fans, 38 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2513 comments, 73 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

This article is a total mess. Mathematicians ascribe to the fallacies it promotes? For example, a subhead reads: "Does creationism provide a reasonable alternative?" A theory can fall on its own lack of merit, without raising the question of a counter-proposal. The article is filled with many similarly bogus arguments that I need not go into, as it is so boring. But another obvious one is the implication that critics of evolution are creationists. Renowned cosmologist Fred Hoyle did not espouse theism by any means, but put forward probability arguments against evolution. Funny the article cites his arguments without citing him personally. His name appears nowhere in the article, even though he made such arguments famous. How dishonest. That would lend too much credibility to the probability arguments and defeat the author's purpose.

Submitted on Saturday, Aug 17, 2019 at 12:11:48 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (1+)
Help
 
Indent

Josh Mitteldorf

Become a Fan Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Sep 14, 2006), 44 fans, 584 articles, 375 quicklinks, 954 comments, 11 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Peter Duveen:   New Content

Thank you, Peter.

Submitted on Saturday, Aug 17, 2019 at 8:13:11 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

Michael Dewey

Become a Fan
Author 11470
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since Feb 15, 2008), 19 fans, 20 articles, 6 quicklinks, 3527 comments, 17 diaries
Facebook Page Twitter Page Linked In Page Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

From a rocking down angels awakening, had quite a few years ago which believe is what was kept secret in Daniel 8:26 about stars and hosts of heaven getting thrown down here and trampled in Daniel 8:9-14 by today's establishment, have come to figure that life always existed and something went wrong which the garden story tells some of. It looks like when things went wrong before even earth existed the big bang threw us down here to work things out. Some rock and roll songs seem to imply that too me also. As Emerson Lake and Palmer sang, "There is no end to my life. No beginning, death is life." The Moody Blues sing of in "Question" "a land that they once knew." Guess we may only find out for sure when we are dead.

A little photo threw together to explain some of the awakening, before knowing these things were kept secret.


(Image by Unknown Owner) Details DMCA

Submitted on Saturday, Aug 17, 2019 at 9:23:20 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Quicklink? Post Comment