(April 9, 2014 at 10:50 am)ThePinsir Wrote: That's one point Dawkins makes that I'm quite fond of. A self-replicating molecule may be improbable, but it only had to happen once.
(April 8, 2014 at 11:58 pm)Heywood Wrote: Negative Tor, the fail is on you.
My example shows that a possible event doesn't have to have a positive probability when throw infinities into the mix.
There are not an infinite number of planets.
Why assume 1 red marble?
Go home. You're drunk.
Pinsir, you have to pay attention. I'm not talking about planets. Tor made a ridiculously wrong claim that has nothing to do with planets. The ridiculously wrong claim he made that I am responding to is this:
"when you have infinite amount of events it's not the probability that is important but a possibility. If something is possible it happens cause there is such a huge number of events. Life is possible. Therefore it happens."
It is ridiculously wrong because just because something is possible doesn't mean it has a positive probability when you throw infinities into the mix. Just because something is possible doesn't mean it will come to fruition even after an infinite number of trials. It is trivially easy to show that he was wrong with the marble example.
