Big Bang ain't got no religion 

log in 
Message boards : Politics : Big Bang ain't got no religion
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 9 · Next
Author  Message 

1 $ID << /dev/random ____________  
ID: 1251881 ·  
1 It's interesting this individual was able to debunk Evolution because DING DING DING he just couldn't see it happening reasonably. Sorry but monkeys writing Shakespeare has nothing to do with evolution or biologic science. This writer basically conflated two separate ideas into one. Also, We don't have Defense Ministers in the US so this was either a Brit trying to sound American or a translation from another language ____________ In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope End terrorism by building a school  
ID: 1251885 ·  
1 If you dig a bit there is a link to an alleged CV for the person who wrote it. Claims he has a BS philosophy, makes him an expert in mathematics I'm sure, and he claims to have a PhD, but doesn't say what that is in. Also that page says the site is damaged from a crash in 2007 and will be restored shortly. Of course Wiki offers a formal proof of the infinite number of monkeys. Yes, to our expectation the probability is low, but if time is infinite then the probability is one or certain. Neat thing about infinities and something very hard for anyone not trained in calculus to grasp. ____________  
ID: 1251903 ·  
Gary, once again you are picking on the mathematically challenged. That person can not understand what you are saying.  
ID: 1251904 ·  
Gary, once again you are picking on the mathematically challenged. That person can not understand what you are saying. But the low hanging fruit makes such a good snack ;) ____________  
ID: 1251907 ·  
  
ID: 1252104 ·  
NARW?  
ID: 1252112 ·  
NARW? North American Right Wingers? ____________  
ID: 1252114 ·  
NARW? No, the correct term for that is "Ditto Head" or DH or can't say that here. ____________  
ID: 1252126 ·  
1 As I said, you are right back to zero. I don't take posting here lightly. I don't take well to people just pronouncing that they are right and then not give any said proof to back it up. I am not a scientist. I rely on others who are scientist to back me up. The one who wrote that site is NOT alone in his belief. As a matter of FACT Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards dismantled YOUR argument in much the same way. Also countless others have slammed YOUR arguent to the ground in the same way. You are wrong. There are laws for very large numbers. I really don't care if you think I don't understand calculus. I do. I don't care if you think that calculus answers your questions correctly. I does not. There are laws for very large numbers. And that number given at the site is indeed a VERY LARGE number. So large it stands right next to zero so claose that YOU cannot tell the differance. Look up [once again] Hyperreals. Laws for very large numbers/ Borels Law Scrool up just a tad here first then read on... You may understand calculus but you seem to stop after that point.  
ID: 1252152 ·  
so large it stands next to zero? REeaalllyyy? again you talk of beliefs and not science. Dismantling a scientific proof is quite difficult. It usually takes more than a few lines and saying "See there it is, I cannot see another possible solution to a problem" as an answer. That is hardly proof positive that something is or isn't correct.  
ID: 1252158 ·  
so large it stands next to zero? REeaalllyyy? again you talk of beliefs and not science. Dismantling a scientific proof is quite difficult. It usually takes more than a few lines and saying "See there it is, I cannot see another possible solution to a problem" as an answer. That is hardly proof positive that something is or isn't correct. Whats a fact Jack is that them two numbers [zero and the one given at the site I posted] walk so close together that when they get up in the morn they get into the same pair of pants. Show some understanding of the math...  
ID: 1252161 ·  
  
ID: 1252175 ·  
Guy, as opposed to EAORW (Everything is Absolute, there is Only Right or Wrong), I suppose.  
ID: 1252200 ·  
ID, it is clear that you do not understand Borel's law of large numbers as applied to random chance and infinity. Borel stated that as long as a probability exists and given an infinite number of attempts the event will occur! At least that is what the link you cited states.  
ID: 1252273 ·  
ID, it is clear that you do not understand Borel's law of large numbers as applied to random chance and infinity. Borel stated that as long as a probability exists and given an infinite number of attempts the event will occur! At least that is what the link you cited states. you could also do the mooWrapper project which is looking to crack secure coding. The project at current rates of work would take about 250 years to process all possible combinations. This isn't infinite. Whats a fact Jack is that them two numbers [zero and the one given at the site I posted] walk so close together that when they get up in the morn they get into the same pair of pants. so 0.000000000000000000000001 is virtually identical to 0.999999999999999999999999? I'm betting math will tell me this are significantly different numbers. So if I were looking at a precision piece of equipment and it said the tolerances were +/ 0.000000000000001 thats not even close to 1 but it is a lot more than 0. You seem to forget your authors point about the magnitude of numbers. ____________ In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope End terrorism by building a school  
ID: 1252284 ·  
Message boards : Politics : Big Bang ain't got no religion
Copyright © 2014 University of California 