Evolutionists are insecure

You are making a basic mathematical mistake. I could explain it apolitically if you would be open-minded to hear it outside of the political mudslinging.

That would be fine.

Politics has nothing to do with it. Brandon is about as right wing as they come. Max is just trying to be something he’s not. He does **** like this all the time.

Please allow Max to make his point. If I am making mathematical mistakes I would like to know.

You are actually making a couple of mistakes... we are going to start with the magic number fallacy. Then we have to talk about graphs (these are probably not what you are thinking... but we might get there).

You are asking the odds of flipping a coin 1000 times and having it come up heads every time. This is a magic number... because this particular sequence of coin flips is something that for you would have meaning.

However, statistically speaking... getting heads 1000 times in a row is equally likely as any another sequence of coin flips. Do you understand this?

The powerball numbers yesterday were 08 12 26 39 42 11. This is no more or less likely than getting 01 02 03 04 05 06. Any combination is equally likely... you just ascribe meaning to one and not to the other. Someone might think that if the numbers came up 01 02 03 04 05 06 that would be proof of something. In reality it is not more proof of anything than 08 12 26 39 42 11. The numbers have to be something and one sequence is no less likely than another.

Are you with me so far?

I’m not stopping him from doing anything.

Yes You are saying that the chance that 1000 heads in a row is the same as the odds of any other combination of coin flips (e.g.----tails,heads,heads.....heads).

So your first mistake is the assumption that we are a magic number.... that there is only one sequence of magic events that could have happened to make a sentient being. In truth... there may be billions of combinations of random events that could have been reached.

Maybe, in this simplified unrealistic mathematical model, had the coin flipped differently... we would be sitting with green skin and 3 tentacles instead of arms saying that there must be a God because the random chances couldn't have happened the way that they did.

There are a lot of possibilities. We didn't end up at any special possibility, we may have just ended up at one of them.

That is your first fallacy... the second fallacy has to do with graph theory.

So, you (and others on the board) are saying that in Biology, it's different than 1/2 to the 2000th power.

Max doesn’t speak for everyone else here. He doesn’t speak for me.

For the second mathematical problem, let me talk about a drinking game we used to play.

In this game the goal is to roll six sixes. Of course, if you roll six dice... it is very unlikely that all of them will be sixes (although as we said, just as likely as any other combination).

However, it isn't unlikely if you can re-roll specific dice. So in the game you roll the six dice. If you get 2 sixes, you leave them a re-roll the other 4 dice. You keep rolling only the non-sixes until you get to the desired state of all sixes.

It turns out that usually someone can always get six sixes in a few minutes, because you keep the dice that are in a good state and only roll the dice you want to change.

The probability of rolling six sixes with no rerolls is just under 1 in 47,000. But with rerolls it is a certainty.

In evolution, there are multiple rerolls.

My thought was that because mutations are usually harmful, it would reduce the odds even more. Using your example, my thought is that you get zapped as soon as you roll a number other than 6.

No... the player doesn't get zapped. You just roll again.

If a parent has a "defective" child who dies, that doesn't stop the genetic line. They keep having children and the fit ones survive.

Max was using "Game Theory 101" to explain that Evolution is more complex than that.
Like I said before, Biology is NOT where I got my Master's Degree.

He’s not talking for me. I’m not a scientist, but I accept evolution because I’m not an idiot. There are times when you need to put your faith in experts.

Actually, Izzy is an idiot who accepts evolution. Mathematically speaking, these are independent variables.

I do not speak for Izzy.

Dysentery on demand.

Now, please explain my #1 complaint against "science":
Scientists used to acknowledge that a human was either male or female. Due to the fetus not developing properly in the uterus, a small percentage of.people are born with sex organs of both genders.
Now, we are told that there is a "range of genders". This has to be something made up. It makes science look silly.

I was talking only about why your point about the mathematics of evolution was invalid.

This seems like a weird switch. Science is science. Science doesn't care about how it looks.

It is not a good thing when you set up a battle between religion and science. Because science doesn't care.

I could explain to you the difference between sex and gender and why the meaning of gender in our society is changing.

I believe it this change is a good thing. It doesn't have anything to do with science.