Aineo wrote:

Jovaro wrote:Haven't I said that about uhm, lets count in my reply 2 posts back orso...
7 times already?
Well if a eighth time will make you happy: I cannot prove evolution with science.
What did you think of my scientific reply btw?

You scientific reply lacked science. You are putting two bowling balls on an existing planet with gravitational forces. If the Big Bang is correct then the contents of the glob of energy should be expanding in equal speeds dispersing gas or energy equally, which by observations of the stars is shown to be not true. There are so many other difficulties with the Big Bang and other theories it really does not make sense to list them all. One is the formation of complex molecules like carbon.

No, no, no, not like that. Gravitational forces of the earth having nothing to do with the gravitational forces between bowlingballs. They attract eachother, whether on earth, space, sea, the moon, whatever. I'll find the formula for you...

Your comparison are invalid because coke cans don't have DNA, and oranges do. And orange does not create itself out of nothing. The outside force that creates the coke can is a manufacturing facility maned by human beings who use raw products mined from the earth, etc. All the orange has to do is grow from a tree based on its genetic code. But, where did the genetic code come from? "In the beginning God created" orange trees.

Is my english that bad? I was comparing oranges with atoms, not with coke cans. The coke cans were being compared to things that do reproduce themselves.
If you would have checked Scorpions link you would have known that the orange-atom comparison was based on the chances that 50 oranges drop down as orderly as atoms. Which is a bad comparison for the reasons mentioned earlier by me.

There is one thing I want to add about all the chances stuff.
You all seem not to realise that the situation as it is now is not the only "good" situation. So chances are not 1something with lots of zeroes), but (not a clue which number could be here)something with lots of zeroes).

And mike, the chances you name are not that extreme I think.
-Big Bang is a big mystery, nobody can say anything useful about that.
-Forming of planets and stars has a very big chance after the Big Bang, given the gravitational forces that are proven to be there. Basic science...
-Chances of a planet with right conditions. Do you know how many planets there are? Very very likely a vast number, about 60 were discovered yet I think, but those were all bigger then our own giant Jupiter, so the number of smaller planets is probably much much bigger. And we even only spot the planets closest to us, nothing beyond our star system. And there is a big number of star-systems as well. So it is pretty safe to assume that there is a vast amount of planets. Chances that at least one of those have the right conditions for life are almost 1:1.
-Organism forming on that planet. You know, the thing with evolution is that there is almost no time-limit. Creationst are trying to disprove that there was so much time, but I never seen any hard evidence for that. (No evidence for that amount of time either, but it is all assumption, try to accept that) Even things with minimal chances will happen once, if given enough time. Several billion years sounds like enough time to me. And if the first organism dies? So what? It can happen again, maybe it will survive that time. Why the hurry, plenty of time...

I'll go find that formula now....