RE: Principles and the Ultimate Challenge.

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:38:27 -0700

I am sad to report that despite my high hopes, Joseph still has not applied the "scientific method".

I am deeply saddened.

Joseph: << The ultimate challenge says that you and Kevin are liars.
That should settle it once and for all.>>

Even after Mike pointed out that Joseph ignored the evidence destroying his "probability" argument.

I'll let the evidence speak for itself.

Mike stated:

"It is unfortunate that you missed Kevin's extremely informative post on this subject. In it, he makes clear that you are misinterpreting both Yockey's paper and the basic use of probabilities in general. To briefly
recap, the point was that these probabilities are meant to show that something cannot have happened *by chance*. Hence an argument along these lines:

1) It can't have happened just by chance.
2) But we know it happened.
3) Therefore, it happened because of some deterministic process, rather
than just by chance.

Evolution is not supposed to happen just by chance. It happens partly by chance (chance mutations) and partly by natural selection (which is certainly not chance). Consequently, the best your probability argument can do is tell evolutionists what they already know: that some non-chance factor is at work."