Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Of Flipping Coins and Clueless EvoTARDs

-
500 coin flips will result in some pattern of heads and tails. This is true. Not only that but each pattern of heads and tails will have the same probability of occurring.

That ain't the issue. Try calling the sequence ahead of time and then toss the coin to see if you can "hit" the pre-specified pattern. If you do there is a good chance that chance alone was not at play.

EvoTARDs are so stupid they do not grasp that point. All heads (500 heads) is a pre-specification. All tails is also.

50 Comments:

  • At 11:08 AM, Blogger Thorton said…

    Oh, you mean like the pre-specified pattern in DNA that you IDiots claim is too improbable for evolution to hit? The pre-specified pattern you IDiots called ahead of time before examining the DNA sequences that produce amino acids?

    Nice own goal. Again.

     
  • At 11:32 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! Hey dumbass, ID is not anti-evolution so we do not make that claim.

    But yes, it is safe to say such a specification did exist wrt biology- just as I have explained to you many times.

     
  • At 11:57 AM, Blogger Thorton said…

    it is safe to say such a specification did exist wrt biology

    You say lots of stupid things you can't back up Joe. It's your trademark.

    Where is the ahead of time specification you called for in any biological feature ?

    Go ahead and scream your favorite change-the-topic cowardly evasion "WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR UNGUIDED EVOLUTION???". You know you want to.

     
  • At 12:01 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Nice projection, tard boy.

    The designer has the specs, thorton. Duh.

     
  • At 12:02 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    BTW I don't have to say that there isn't any evidence for unguided evolution producing biological systems and sub-systems. everyone already knows it.

    I see that it still bothers you that your position has nothing but cowardly equivocations and shit-munching spewage.

     
  • At 12:32 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    The designer has the specs

    But you can't identify the designer, can't provide any evidence of these claimed ahead of time specs.

    You're talking out of your ass again as usual. Got it.

     
  • At 12:35 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! I don't have to id the designer to know there were specs. I can id a specification by identifying the design. Archaeologists do it all of the time.

    IOW you really think that your ignorance means something. And THAT is hilarious.

     
  • At 1:00 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    I don't have to id the designer to know there were specs.

    LOL! Right. Just like JoeMath, you don't have to support the stupidity, you just know it.

    I can id a specification by identifying the design. Archaeologists do it all of the time

    Archaeologists don't rely on ahead of time "specifications". They look for similarities to other known designed human artifacts - materials, tool marks, style, the identity of people who lived in the area at the time.

    You IDiots don't have any of that with biological life, and you don't have any "ahead of time" specifications for your CSI claims. All you're got is the turd you keep chewing on.

     
  • At 1:05 PM, Blogger Joe G said…


    Archaeologists don't rely on ahead of time "specifications".


    I never said they did. I said they figure out the specification by studying the artifact.

    It's as if you are proud to be an ignorant asshole.

    Look it is a given that stonehenge had a specification, yet we haven't found it. The same goes for the Great Pyramid- Khufu- we know there was a plan yet we haven't found it.

    BTW if your position had some positive support you wouldn't have to worry about ID nor CSI. But you have nothing but your ignorance and that bothers you.

     
  • At 1:31 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    Look it is a given that stonehenge had a specification, yet we haven't found it. The same goes for the Great Pyramid- Khufu- we know there was a plan yet we haven't found it.

    It's only a given because of the ample other evidence those objects were designed and built by humans.

    You IDiots are basing your entire "life was designed" assertion on your claimed ahead of time specification, the one you can't provide. It's all just the same old "gee, this looks designed to me" stupidity.

    Poor Joe. Is there any scientific subject you're not woefully incompetent in?

     
  • At 1:37 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    It's only a given because of the ample other evidence those objects were designed and built by humans.

    So what? We still cannot provide the pre-specifications for any of them.

    IOW there isn't any difference. You are just an incompotent moron.

    BTW it not only looks designed, your position doesn't have any explanation for it. And that bothers you.

     
  • At 1:54 PM, Blogger Jerad said…

    "Look it is a given that stonehenge had a specification, yet we haven't found it. The same goes for the Great Pyramid- Khufu- we know there was a plan yet we haven't found it."

    Both of which have lots and lots of precursors which we've studied and gives us insight into what the designers were working towards and why.

     
  • At 1:57 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    It's called knowledge of cause and effect relationships, just as I have been saying for decades.

    And BTW those precursors didn't come with specifications either.

     
  • At 4:12 PM, Blogger Jerad said…

    And BTW those precursors didn't come with specifications either.

    If you find an object or construction and you also find lots and lots of similar objects/constructions all dated to a similar time with clearly similar construction techniques and a clear developmental process then you can make an attempt, at least, at getting at the designers' specifications and goals. As you can do with Stonehenge and the Egyptian pyramids.

    Erich Von Daniken got it wrong because he did not do the work to find out all the precursory knowledge. But he did sell a lot of books and convinced a lot of people. Didn't make him right though.

     
  • At 4:23 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "It's called knowledge of cause and effect relationships, just as I have been saying for decades."

    Only man can design complex machinery.

    That's the current state of our knowledge of cause and effect.

    So what's your inference, Cupcake?

     
  • At 4:44 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Only man can design complex machinery.

    That's the current state of our knowledge of cause and effect.


    And if man wasn't around we infer it was some other agency. Mother nature doesn't miraculously get the ability to design complex machinery when man isn't around.

     
  • At 4:46 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Jerad, thank you for making my point.

     
  • At 5:34 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "and if man wasn't around we infer it was some other agency"

    Oh good, must be RM/NS and associated forces then, as we know they exist and have no reason to believe they didn't exits then.

    Most parsimonious. Thanks for showing what a crock ID is again, fatboy.

     
  • At 5:51 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    4 problems with that:

    1- You are a moron

    2- RM/NS is not an agency

    3- RM/NS require the very thing that needs to be explained. IOW they didn't exist until a living organism capable of RM/NS was here.

    and 4- RM/NS have been observed and proven to be deficient for the task at hand

    Most ignoramus. Thank you for continuing to demonstrate that you are one ignorant limp noodle, Richie.

     
  • At 6:14 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    LOL@FAYYCHUBS!

    1. Given your misunderstandings of most things, I pleased that is your opinion, Cupcake

    2.http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agency

    "2

    : the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power : operation"

    OOOPS, fatty!

    3. They need less complex precursors that have imperfect reproduction.

    4. Sop many logic and science fails in that one. Look at JoeScience(c! Now with proofyness.

    Well done, laughing stock.

     
  • At 6:15 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Oh, and ignoramus is a noun, ignoramus.

    Can this boy do anything right?

     
  • At 7:34 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! Natural selection is not an agency. Darwin invented it as an agency substitute, ie a designer mimic. But you, being an ignoramus, wouldn't understand that.

    And what less complex precursors? They don't exist and there isn't any evidence ofr them ever existing.

    And again, there isn't any evidence that natural selection, which includes RM BTW, can do anything. It doesn't have any power to exert.

    So you have a total FAIL, again, as usual.

    Thank you.

     
  • At 7:54 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    "The Origin of Theoretical Population Genetics" (University of Chicago Press, 1971), reissued in 2001 by William Provine:

    "Natural selection does not act on anything, nor does it select (for or against), force, maximize, create, modify, shape, operate, drive, favor, maintain, push, or adjust. Natural selection does nothing….Having natural selection select is nifty because it excuses the necessity of talking about the actual causation of natural selection. Such talk was excusable for Charles Darwin, but inexcusable for evolutionists now. Creationists have discovered our empty “natural selection” language, and the “actions” of natural selection make huge, vulnerable targets." (pp. 199-200)


    Thanks for the honesty Will.


    ooops....

     
  • At 9:34 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    So Richie says:

    Only man can design complex machinery.

    That's the current state of our knowledge of cause and effect.


    And then he tries to pull natural selection out of his ass as a designer of complex machinery.

    Richie is one totally confuced cupcake.

     
  • At 10:30 AM, Blogger socle said…

    Jerad:

    Every possible sequence of 500 Hs and Ts is equally likely. We all agree.

    Joe:

    No, Jerad, that is false. The odds of getting some pattern is exactly 1 and it won’t be all H not all T.

    I think KF disagrees with you, Joe. He speaks of the "500-coin case config space of 2^500 ~ 3.27 * 10^150 possibilities", and states:

    "And in our case the calculable probability of 500 H is 1 in 3.27 * 10^150".

    That's strangely, uh, consistent with the proposition that all 2^500 sequences are equally likely.

     
  • At 10:49 AM, Blogger socle said…

    Ok, I should have reviewed the OP before I posted, because you say:

    Not only that but each pattern of heads and tails will have the same probability of occurring.

    But now that statement is "false", because Jerad is saying it rather than you.

     
  • At 12:34 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    socle,

    Are you saying that the odds of getting some pattern is not 1?

     
  • At 1:30 PM, Blogger socle said…

    Are you saying that the odds of getting some pattern is not 1?

    Of course not. What I am saying is that for some reason you disagree with:

    Every possible sequence of 500 Hs and Ts is equally likely.

    even though in the OP, you asserted the same thing:

    Not only that but each pattern of heads and tails will have the same probability of occurring.

     
  • At 9:30 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Context

     
  • At 9:43 PM, Blogger socle said…

    Since the experiment is the same, I don't see how the contexts differ. In any case, for record, do you agree that in 500 flips of a fair coin, the sequences

    HTHHHTHTTHTHHHHHTHHHTTHTT
    HHTTHTTTHHHHTTHTHTHTHTHHH
    HTHHTHHTHTTHHTHTHHTHHTHHT
    HTTHTHTTHHTTTTHHHHHHHHTHT
    HTHTHHHHTTHTTHTTHTTHTHTHT
    HHTHHTHHTHHTTHTHTTTTTHTHT
    HHTHHTTTHHTTTTHHTHHTTHHTH
    THHTHHHHTHHTHHTHHTHHTTTHT
    TTTTHHHHTTHTHTTHHHHTHTTTH
    THHHTHHHTHTTHHHHTHTTTTHHT
    TTHHHHHHTHHTHTTHTTTHHTTTH
    HTTTHTHTHHTTTTTTTTTTHTHTT
    TTHHHHHHTHTHTHHTTHHHTHTTH
    THTTTTHHTHTHTHHTHHTTHTTHH
    HHTTTHTTHTHTHHTTHTTHHHTTH
    HTHTTTHHHHTTTHTHTHTTHTTHH
    HHTHTHTHTHHTTHTTHTTHTTTHH
    TTHTTTHHHTHHHTHTHHHTHTHTT
    TTTTHHTTHHTTHHHHTTTHHTHHT
    TTHTTTHTTHHTTHTHTHTHHHHTT

    and

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    are equally likely?

     
  • At 10:46 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Known and observed Evolutionary mechanisms:

    http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2007/10/rm-ns-creationist-and-id-strawman.html

    Instances of 'the designer' touching life: Zero.

    Occam's Razor...

     
  • At 8:31 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! Allen is clueless, Richie.

    As far as he knows those alleged evolutionary mechanisms are DESIGN mechanisms- just as I told him.

    There isn't any evidence they are blind watchmaker mechanisms- except for point mutations. And not one of those mechanisms have been demonstrated to be able to produce a living organism from non-living matter and energy.

    IOW your bald link without explanation is a total failure, just like you.

     
  • At 8:31 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Instances of blind watchmaker mechanisms producing life: Zero

     
  • At 8:33 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    socle,

    The odds of getting a pattern with 500 flips is exactly 1. Jerad and the rest seem to think that the odds of any pattern is 1 in 2^500.

    That ain't so for the reason provided.

     
  • At 8:48 AM, Blogger socle said…

    socle,

    The odds of getting a pattern with 500 flips is exactly 1. Jerad and the rest seem to think that the odds of any pattern is 1 in 2^500.

    That ain't so for the reason provided.


    It seems you've misread then. Both Jerad and KF have said the probability of each particular sequence is 2^-500.

    Regardless of what you think the others have said, do you agree that both sequences I have posted have probability 2^-500 of occurring?

     
  • At 9:08 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Read the OP and buy a vowel:

    Try calling the sequence ahead of time and then toss the coin to see if you can "hit" the pre-specified pattern. If you do there is a good chance that chance alone was not at play.

     
  • At 9:30 AM, Blogger socle said…

    Read the OP and buy a vowel:

    I did, and that's the issue. In the OP you made a statement with the exact same meaning as Jerad's, but you claimed Jerad's was false (with no difference in context).

    Contrary to what you said, Jerad's statement was correct.

    Try calling the sequence ahead of time and then toss the coin to see if you can "hit" the pre-specified pattern. If you do there is a good chance that chance alone was not at play.

    This I would agree with (along with everyone else).

     
  • At 9:38 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Context, asshole.

    According to Jerad if I toss a coin 500 times I just participated in an event with a 1 in 2^500 odds.

    That is false.

     
  • At 11:04 AM, Blogger socle said…

    Context, asshole.

    According to Jerad if I toss a coin 500 times I just participated in an event with a 1 in 2^500 odds.

    That is false.


    It's either true or false, depending on what the event is. Of course you have failed to describe the event precisely, leaving the door open to equivocation.

    If E is the event of getting some sequence of H's and T's, then P(E) = 1, trivially.

    If E is the event of getting a particular sequence of H's and T's, then P(E) = 2^-500.

    Nothing Jerad posted conflicts with that.

     
  • At 12:10 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    socle,

    I qualified my statement to Jerad

     
  • At 2:56 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Its so funny wathcing you at UD - you keep trying to join in and the grown-ups keep ignoring you!

     
  • At 8:53 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! Only the willfully ignorasnt pathological liars ignore me, Richie.

     
  • At 10:37 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Not very nice of you to call UD that, but I agree.

     
  • At 10:41 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Richie agrees that Lizzie, Mark, Alan and keiths are all ignorant pathological liars.

    Cool.

     
  • At 11:56 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    No, I said UD. Again, you just can't read / understand.

    Its funny to see you standing on your tippy-toes at the table, trying to join in with your throw-away comments, and them ignore you. Everyone finds you an idiot, a total waste of time. Even your corrector, KF.

     
  • At 1:07 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL! I was talking about Lizzie, Mark, Alan and keiths.

    So it appears that Richie cannot read because i didn't say anything about UD. UD doesn't ignore me...

     
  • At 1:12 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    It seems most of UD is ignoring you Joe. Do you think those 4 are 'most of UD"?

    IDIOT. Failed at logic again.

    keep commenting though. Its funny to see you being ignored.

     
  • At 1:26 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Richie,

    You are plain wrong, as usual.

    For one I am not posting anything for IDists to respond to. I am directly refuting the lies of Lizzie, Alan, Mark, keiths and Neil.

    And those asswipes have to ignore me because they know if they engage they will be eviscerated.

    IOW once again you prove that you are an ignorant asshole.

     
  • At 1:35 PM, Blogger socle said…

    And those asswipes have to ignore me because they know if they engage they will be eviscerated.

    lol.

    I see you're commenting on Sewell's 2LoT argument at UD. Why don't you do an OP here on the subject?

     
  • At 1:59 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    LoL!

    Why don't you shut the fuck up or start producing positive evidence for your position.

    Start with a testable hypothsis.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home