Mastropaolo's probabilities are fun!

Mike Hardie (hardie@globalserve.net)
Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:03:53 -0700

Joseph Mastropaolo has recently been very vocal on the subject of
probabilities. Specifically, he has calculated a certain (astronomical)
improbability for evolution, and from this deduced that evolution is
astronomically implausible. The basic error in this kind of thinking have
been dealt with already, but he appears to have ignored those posts. So,
I'll try a different method. Let's assume that Joseph's operating
principle is correct -- i.e., that if the chance for something to happen a
certain way is astronomically improbable, then that thing did not happen.

Exactly what is the probability that there exists a God who has those
properties which appear to be required to create and design the world?
These properties at least include:

1) Omnipotence.
2) The desire to create the world.
3) The desire to create life.

Well, we can hypothesize deities with *any* kinds of traits. We could
suppose Gods which had none of those traits, or a few of them, or a
completely different set. The possible combinations of traits we could
assign to God are practically limitless. So, one astronomic improbability.

Now, what are the chances that this God, if one existed, would create the
world / life exactly as He supposedly did? I.e., exactly as described in
the Bible? Here again, the possibilites are limitless. We *could* suppose
a God who created the world out of a lotus-flower, and then populated it
with 300-foot talking squirrels. Again, God creating the world a certain
way is astronomically improbable, given all the other ontologically
possibilities.

I don't have the time it would take to actually calculate a number here.
But given that the possibilities, in each case, are nearly *infinite*,
allow me to hazard a guess that the probability is well below the 0.95% (or
whatever it was) that Joseph considers necessary.

Therefore, a God such as the Bible describes is so improbable as to be
nearly impossible, and, even if one did exist, it would be essentially
impossible for Him to have designed the world exactly as it is. Thus,
Joseph Mastropaolo's creationistic beliefs are soundly falsified.

Right?

Well, no, of course not. We all know that this sort of probability
equation relies on faulty assumptions, and consequently cannot at all
establish whether something actually happened. But if he were to apply his
fallacious reasoning consistently, he would have to accept that conclusion.
Do you, Joseph?

Regards,

Mike Hardie
<hardie@globalserve.net>
http://www.globalserve.net/~hardie/dv/