I will prove to you that God exists

[Paleophyte]

Efficiency of the Universe at Producing Humans:

For an average individual:
   By time: 0.00000059% (assuming an average lifespan of 72 years)
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002% 
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000019%

For the entire species: (assuming 108 Billion humans have existed over the last 300,000 years)
   By time: 0.0022%
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%

I think that we can safely conclude that the universe is a piss-poor human-making machine.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Efficiency of the Universe at Producing Humans:

For an average individual:
   By time: 0.00000059% (assuming an average lifespan of 72 years)
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002% 
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000019%

For the entire species: (assuming 108 Billion humans have existed over the last 300,000 years)
   By time: 0.0022%
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%

I think that we can safely conclude that the universe is a piss-poor human-making machine.

Careful big numbers fry his brain and causes it to spew incredulity

[Ravenshire]

Be fucking careful what buttons you push, junior.

Some staff are FAR more tolerant than I am.

I'm not sure spelling, or grammar, are glass panes that Bullwinkle should be pitching rocks at either. Whilst it's acceptable to start a sentence with the word and, it seems to be entirely redundant in that sentence, along with the two missing commas, I think we may be dealing with a master of irony.

(my bold)

More likely, we're dealing with a Jr. High kid in his spare time between bouts of PornHub.

[Sheldon]

I'm not sure spelling, or grammar, are glass panes that Bullwinkle should be pitching rocks at either. Whilst it's acceptable to start a sentence with the word and, it seems to be entirely redundant in that sentence, along with the two missing commas, I think we may be dealing with a master of irony.

(my bold)

More likely, we're dealing with a Jr. High kid in his spare time between bouts of PornHub.

Sounds more plausible, but what do I know, I think unknown natural causes are more plausible, than unevidenced magic.

[Sheldon]

Efficiency of the Universe at Producing Humans:

For an average individual:
   By time: 0.00000059% (assuming an average lifespan of 72 years)
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002% 
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000019%

For the entire species: (assuming 108 Billion humans have existed over the last 300,000 years)
   By time: 0.0022%
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%

I think that we can safely conclude that the universe is a piss-poor human-making machine.

Wow, that god sure is mysterious.

[Sheldon]

Efficiency of the Universe at Producing Humans:

For an average individual:
   By time: 0.00000059% (assuming an average lifespan of 72 years)
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002% 
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000019%

For the entire species: (assuming 108 Billion humans have existed over the last 300,000 years)
   By time: 0.0022%
   By mass: 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%
   By volume: 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002%

I think that we can safely conclude that the universe is a piss-poor human-making machine.

Careful big numbers fry his brain and causes it to spew incredulity

It's time Drew understood that probability is a scientific theory, not a subjective opinion, and the "this seems to involve long odds, that I have subjectively decided aren't possible, so I am going to insert an unevidenced deity, using inexplicable magic, from an archaic superstition", argument, is never going to pass muster with the scientific world, or anyone citing rational objections.

[The Valkyrie]

Or insists ulterior motive to our non acceptance of his nonsense or whines about us pointing out when he's using a fallacy

I'm trying to preserve livers.

Formaldehyde.

You're welcome.

[Alan V]

It's time Drew understood that probability is a scientific theory, not a subjective opinion, and the "this seems to involve long odds, that I have subjectively decided aren't possible, so I am going to insert an unevidenced deity, using inexplicable magic, from an archaic superstition", argument, is never going to pass muster with the scientific world, or anyone citing rational objections.

In general, theists keep promoting their philosophical arguments when cosmology long ago became a science. Drew is just another case of Maslow's hammer.

They haven't caught up with the simple fact that science, again and again, has decisively shown that the way the universe actually works is counter-intuitive.

You have to be able to do the math, or at least to believe the people who can.

[Sheldon]

It's time Drew understood that probability is a scientific theory, not a subjective opinion, and the "this seems to involve long odds, that I have subjectively decided aren't possible, so I am going to insert an unevidenced deity, using inexplicable magic, from an archaic superstition", argument, is never going to pass muster with the scientific world, or anyone citing rational objections.

In general, theists keep promoting their philosophical arguments when cosmology long ago became a science.  Drew is just another case of Maslow's hammer.

They haven't caught up with the simple fact that science, again and again, has decisively shown that the way the universe actually works is counter-intuitive.

You have to be able to do the math, or at least to believe the people who can.

This is going to be difficult for Drew, as his posts suggest that he doesn't understand the difference between scientific fact, and an appeal to authority fallacy. As he has used the latter, as if it is the former. I could care less about the subjective religious beliefs of a creationist, even if they happen to be a Nobel prize winner in Physics, though more often of course, creationist compile lists of "scientists", that include primary school teachers in religious education.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It's time Drew understood that probability is a scientific theory, not a subjective opinion, and the "this seems to involve long odds, that I have subjectively decided aren't possible, so I am going to insert an unevidenced deity, using inexplicable magic, from an archaic superstition", argument, is never going to pass muster with the scientific world, or anyone citing rational objections.

In general, theists keep promoting their philosophical arguments when cosmology long ago became a science.  Drew is just another case of Maslow's hammer.

They haven't caught up with the simple fact that science, again and again, has decisively shown that the way the universe actually works is counter-intuitive.

You have to be able to do the math, or at least to believe the people who can.

To paraphrase a former user here, I broke my math bone when I was a kid and it never healed properly. Therefore, I tend to trust experts in mathematics (or any other field in which I’m not competent).

Boru