RE: Easy arguments against the Bible, and religion as a whole
December 16, 2011 at 4:08 am
(This post was last modified: December 16, 2011 at 4:26 am by chi pan.)
"Correct application of the scientific method is still no promise of accuracy btw. You can do everything right and still be wrong. Sad but true. The scientific method provides us with explanations that carry a decent amount of provisional certainty. That is to say "this is our explanation, until such a time as new information becomes available to us about either the subject at hand or our methods for determining the veracity of this explanation". One of the strengths of the whole enterprise actually."
agreed though you can use the scientific method to prove something wrong, you cannot use it to prove something right b/c you may do something else later that proves it wrong.
ok i've given up the point of reasoning so lets move on to numbers. i found a video that talks about how complicated a simple protien is and how it had to have been put together by someone who knows what they're doing using numbers, now everyone can understand numbers.
to sumerize it a little there are 20 different kinds of amino acids and 200 of them make a simple protien. that means these amino acids would have 10^260 (that's 10 to the power of 260) different combinations but only one is right. lets say "the average joe" is putting these together rather than nature since it would take nature longer to try out combinations even is it was possible. scientists theorize the universe to be about 20 billion years which is about 630,720,000,000,000,000 seconds. that means "the average joe" would have to try 1.585x10^243 combinations per second for 20 billion years to hit every combination. now it's possible he could hit the right one half way but that still hardly puts a dent in the numbers si it's impossible for the average joe to make a protien in 20 billion years and you think nature could do it? and that's not mentioning that those conditions that were suitable to make them didn't exist in space according to the theory, but on earth. anyways here's the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjQtqg3yy...re=related
and this is a source, not a testamony.
agreed though you can use the scientific method to prove something wrong, you cannot use it to prove something right b/c you may do something else later that proves it wrong.
ok i've given up the point of reasoning so lets move on to numbers. i found a video that talks about how complicated a simple protien is and how it had to have been put together by someone who knows what they're doing using numbers, now everyone can understand numbers.
to sumerize it a little there are 20 different kinds of amino acids and 200 of them make a simple protien. that means these amino acids would have 10^260 (that's 10 to the power of 260) different combinations but only one is right. lets say "the average joe" is putting these together rather than nature since it would take nature longer to try out combinations even is it was possible. scientists theorize the universe to be about 20 billion years which is about 630,720,000,000,000,000 seconds. that means "the average joe" would have to try 1.585x10^243 combinations per second for 20 billion years to hit every combination. now it's possible he could hit the right one half way but that still hardly puts a dent in the numbers si it's impossible for the average joe to make a protien in 20 billion years and you think nature could do it? and that's not mentioning that those conditions that were suitable to make them didn't exist in space according to the theory, but on earth. anyways here's the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjQtqg3yy...re=related
and this is a source, not a testamony.
