From: Debbie Mann (deborahjmann@insightbb.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 12:13:23 EDT
BlankIt was calculated on the basis of probability. I got his books from the
library, so I cannot confirm the exact quantities used. Basically, if
experimentally, it takes 3 days for a particular process to occur and the
probability of it occuring is 10^X then it should occur on average once
every (don't know the details of his math.) He went over the experiment
where ureas were created in the laboratory from various building blocks,
pointing out that yes, all these building blocks had been independently
determined to develop naturally, however not at the same time in the same
place and not in large quantities in a pure form. And, urea is not life. He
then went on to stack probabilities. And he analyzed the conditions and the
order and the probabilities and the fact that there are very different
conditions required for creating life with building blocks.
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Robert Schneider
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 10:28 AM
To: Asa
Subject: Re: fine tuning
Debbie writes:
There is also the biological argument from the web page. Robert Shapiro
has several books touting the same thing. The simplest life that we know
requires a complex series of events each of which should take millenia to
occur. However, several of them must occur within the same sphere in a
period of a couple of months. And, they each have different biological
requirements in order to evolve. That first strand of DNA, or even RNA, is a
mighty big task.
Debbie Mann, PE
Debbie Mann Consulting
(765)477-1776
Bob's query:
On what basis does one conclude that, granting for the sake of
argument that a complex series of events is required, it would take
"millenia" for each to occur?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 12:10:11 EDT