Intelligent Design is not creationism

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Teleologist, Nov 4, 2006.

  1. jem

    jem


    I guess I do not worry about getting into an argument about what you actually meant.

    You just proved my point. Exactly.

    Now lets wait and see if this is how KJ would apply his concepts of probability theory.
     
    #1441     Jan 17, 2007
  2. If there are only two generals (General ID and General Chance), who will fight in only one battle (the creation of the universe battle), then the probability of either general emerging victorious is 50/50.

    Now go factor two quadradics and call your doctor in the morning.
     
    #1442     Jan 17, 2007
  3. jem

    jem


    A specious and pathetic answer.
     
    #1443     Jan 17, 2007
  4. As the Chinese say, good posts get good answers. Pathetic posts get pathetic answers. :D
     
    #1444     Jan 17, 2007
  5. If you actually knew anything about probability, you would realize that the answer is directly on point. But, because you don't, you think it's specious.

    I can't help you from your ignorance. You need to take a probability and statistics class.
     
    #1445     Jan 17, 2007
  6. jem

    jem

    On point, The qualifiers you employed took your anwwer off point completely.

    I can see now you have no idea how to properly apply statistics or probabliity theory.

    You compared the odds of the universe being hospitable to life with a 50 50 outcome --- and you named the outcome general ID or general chance. (a very deceptive technique. i thought you were using it to fool the audience but I realized you fooled yourself.)

    Your understanding of the proper application of probability theory is on display for all to see.

    Previously I thought you were just being argumentative now I realize you have no understanding at all.
     
    #1446     Jan 17, 2007
  7. Gee, now if you could only prove your speculations, you would be golden. Unfortunately, all you can do is make claims, because you don't really know what you're talking about.

    If you do, feel free to show us all the math that supports a different outcome to support your speculative conclusion.
     
    #1447     Jan 17, 2007
  8. jem

    jem

    If I bring you the math that says is not a 50 50 chance will you concede and say our universe looks designed.

    Beside that is not the point.

    You have now asserted two completely different claims.

    On one hand you are arguming 50 50 chance on the other hand you are saying the universe is the way it is and there is no way of defining the odds of being that way because we need more trials.

    One way or the other you are full of shit and proved you do not understand how to apply probability theory.

    now I understand why you made a mistake - it is the same error James bond made about the generals.

    you confuse a 50 50 outcome like the flip of a coin with a situation in which there is no way to properly define the odds (your argument about the cosmological constant) -

    Even then your argument misses the point because there may be infinite ways for our universe to not exist and only one way for it to exist. There is no logical way to argue the existence of the universe is a binary event.

    it is a subtle distinction that frequently seperates the posers from the people who really know how to think.
     
    #1448     Jan 17, 2007
  9. No. There is nothing to concede here.

    The universe does look designed. But it isn't as far as we can observe.

    You missed the point, again. Flip a coin once. Just once. Let's say you get a head. Now tell us the reason why you get a head. Or if you get a tail, tell us the reason for the tail. Don't use random ignorant chance. Tell us exactly why when you flip the coin only once, you get whatever you get.
     
    #1449     Jan 17, 2007
  10. jem

    jem

    We know how you think. It makes me wonder whether you know how to "trade".

    Prior to you posting your response I
    deleted that part of the post because I did not think it was appropriate to put down anyones trading.
     
    #1450     Jan 17, 2007