Question about probabilities and the conditions of life

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW -

But there is no actual debate with you. No matter how many times your strawmen are pointed out, you go back to them and proclaim that there is no answer.

No matter how many times your quotes are uncovered for the deceptions that they are, you just keep throwing the same ones out. You even delude yourself into thinking you have good quotes when the author himself directly addresses the quote and calls you wrong.

You keep making that factless claim that you have been unnable to sustain in actual debate and review.

I keep opening the door WIDE for you to answer with some kind of compelling factual response - and yet you pretend that the subject is too deep for you and the english language too complex. WHY not simply RESPOND to the points that have been shown to fully debunk your story telling?

Why LEAVE it and run away as you do -- and then claim that your fleeing is some kind of "victory"??!!

Who in the world goes for that stuff!!??

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW
You think that you can just declare victory when you have brought the discussion to stalemate by refusing to debate.

Your blunders are almost as glaring as your revisionism.

I AM the one that KEEPS posting on the threads you run away from!

I am the one that KEEPS reminding YOU of your own test cases and how they have failed.

YOU are the one that keeps running away in thread after thread after thread!.

Stop running UTEOTW - pick at least ONE item on that list of your failures and attempt some kind of come-back some effort at "compelling" response.

All you have done is repeat your last failing statements on those points - and you refuse to deal with the ETAILS that were SHOWN to fully debunk your wild-eyed fantasies! So you add to that -- "running away" as if that really "seals the deal" for you!

And indeed from a certain perspective I suppose that running away really is the fitting end to your blunders listed in the summary post above.

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW
I have merely tired of beating my head

Oh say it is not so... running away "again"???

Here let me once again summarized your failures so far...

LINKS back to the posts ALREADY fully exposing your blunders IN DETAIL (in inconvenient detail if one is a atheist darwinist) will be added here.

 

[BobRyan]

Here we see summaries of UTEOTW’s rejecting EVEN Atheist Darwinist ewhenver THEY are objective . One is begins here

#1. The uniform continuous transformation from start to end SHOWN in the initial fraudulent sequence NEVER happened in nature.
#2. The Gradual reduction of side toes SHOWN in the initial fraudulent sequence NEVER happened.
#3. The Single line of descent (with many generations between each line node admittedly) NEVER happened.
#4. Individuals often “RETAINED their foot with NO FURTHER CHANGES” – unlike the fraudulent sequence “Story”.
#5. The TRENDS affecting the whole horse family as SHOWN in the initial fraudulent sequence – DO NOT HAPPEN! In fact “No known trend affected the WHOLE horse family”

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=793293&postcount=227


http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=794706&postcount=238

And here
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=794710&postcount=239

My point is very concise and pointed here –
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=795607&postcount=250

It is left as an exercise for the read to click on the links and SEE UTEOTW's blunders fully exposed with his contradiction of his own atheist darwinist masters on the debunked discredited horse series!!

And of course - UJTEOTW merely "runs away" in response.

With the issues set so clearly before us - where the points are all obvious and seeing that UTEOTW does not hold to integrity even in this simple example - how could we trust him to honestly discuss more complex issues?

 

[BobRyan]

PATTERSON and UTEOTW:

I point out UTEOTW’s failed attempt to abuse Patterson here – noting that an entire thread is now available for UTEOTW to try and make his case if it can be made at all.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=792472&postcount=205

I first point out UTEOTW’s deceitful use of Patterson here –
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=788798&postcount=165

Here I show how I DO use the very quote that Patterson is recommending and promoting in his letters
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=788799&postcount=166


UTEOTW and Revisionism:

Here I expose UTEOTW’s revisionism practices In the thread we are discussing- he snippets his OWN quote of me and then claims I provided no context or explanation for my statement – when all he had to do was quote and link to MY post of “me” to show that context and comment given by me – instead of claiming I gave no explanation at all for my quote.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=790030&postcount=191

Here we have the full context for Patterson’s letter AND the actual details of the problem being addressed – as posted by the one writing to Patterson – Posted on UTEOTW’s OWN buddy-web site Talk Origins and STILL UTEOTW runs away – fleeing HIS OWN group in his tireless efforts to escape his own failures.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=819744&postcount=43

There we see the loyal devotees of atheist Darwinism Theunissen himself posting at Talk origins showing the FULL context of the letter and fully debunking UTEOTW’s wild claims!

And of course “predictably” UTEOTW is nowhere to be found on that thread – no respond but his vacuous factless-claims to victory “no matter what the facts”?

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW pretends that he does not understand probability sciences or statistics so he attacks Emile Borel and provides his own glaring blunder as an example of “doing the statistically impossible”.


This totally discredited example from UTEOTW is where HE suggests that we think of a 52 card sequence as something that is “impossible”. Classic failure on UTEOTW’s part – we thank him for creating that here for all to read - (Debunked many times on this thread - one of them being here - http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...7&postcount=61 )

YOU jumped off that cliff in an attempt to attack all of statistics and probability science as you attack the Nobel winning mathmatician Dr. Borel. Congrats on exposing yourself like that to the entire board!

Facts:

#1. Statistics shows that the odds are 1:1 that GIVEN a 52 card deck- any shuffle and deal will result in a 52 card sequence.

#2. Statistics shows that the probability of getting ONE of the 10^67 sequences is 1. 100%. In other words you have no chance of getting 53 card or 51 card sequence.

#3. Statistics states that being able to “predict” which of the sequences you will get (in a well shuffled deck) is very unlikely – in fact impossible.


Note that the cultist above CLAIMS to have done what “was impossible” and yet he does NOT SELECT one of the outcomes and then SHOW that what he selected WAS in fact dealt (the impossible scenario according to the hard science of statistics).

And of course this is the point where UTEOTW's shallow transparent attack on Emile Borel ends. And so “predictably” UTEOTW is nowhere to be found on that thread – no respond but his vacuous factless-claims to victory “no matter what the facts”?

With the issues set so clearly before us - where the points are all obvious and seeing that UTEOTW does not hold to integrity even in this simple example - how could we trust him to honestly discuss more complex issues?

 

[BobRyan]

As for UTEOTW continually running away from the problem that REAL CELLS have REAL proteins that REALLY make up cell structures and enzymes -- well his "NO protein" CELL idea is a joke and does not solve the problem for MAKING a REAL cell since he has no RNA solution for doing it!

But he keeps resonding with the vaccuous RNA argument "anyway" as IF we simply will not "notice" that cells HAVE Protein structures"!! AND NO Model of ABIOGENESIS "story telling" can survive without building one in its fairytale thought experiments.

(I keep wanting to say "How pathetic" as each one of UTEOTW's blunders are rehersed for him to "run away" from time after time -- but that would be using UTEOTW's words.)

 

[BobRyan]

Now of course I accept that for UTEOTW - no link, no data, no argument, no fact will disuade him from devotion to atheist darwinism EVEN if it means he must run away from HIS OWN test case examples supposedly tailored to PROVE his arguments!!

That is just "a given".

 

[BobRyan]

The modern day incarnation of the witch doctor is the atheist darwinist who (claiming that there IS NO GOD) must find a way to bring the living from the dead in his/her story of abiogenesis to explain the origin of living cells!

The modern day incarnation of the alchemist and their wild tales of spontaneous generation (living things generated from non-living environments) is the cult of atheist darwinism. Since atheists claim "there is NO GOD" they must tell stories about living cells sponanteously generated from non-living environments.

Having nothing in the lab to support them -- they simply "make stuff up" and hope you will not notice the "bait and switch game" - they play swapping in MOLECULES in place of the far more complex LIVING CELL, and ignoring the fact that LIVING CELLS are comprised of cell structures made out of proteins as well as enzymes made out of proteins!

How sad that some people here have chosen these modern day alchemists and witch doctors as their doctrinal masters when it comes to God's statements on "Origins" and the author of life!!

Even worse is their determination to "run away" from every discussion that debunks their flawed mythology!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[UTEOTW]

Bob

You just don't get it.

It is not possible to have a rational debate with you. You are not rational. And you don't debate, you rant.

You have no ability to do anything but twist and distort.

I told you in my last post that you had said nothing new and that my previous post was still sufficient to cover everything you had said. You twisted that into saying that I was admitting that I have no answer.

I told you that I have tired of beating my head against the wall with you. You lied and said that I was fleeing debate and smugly, and falsely, claimed victory.

I have never fled debate. Ever. I have and will answer every single issue that comes up.

You, on the other hand, have been empirically shown to not even read posts before returning to your scripted rants.

You, on the other hand, will flee from the facts if you can ever be brought near them. Look no further than your "banded iron" debacle on this very thread. You thought you had a fact to present and when it did not work out for you, you spent a few pages trying to muddy the waters and then you just abandoned all hope of ever returning to something you brought up. How many times has this happened before. How many times have you tried to slip in what you thought was a supporting fact and when you were shown to be incorrect, tried to pretend it did not exist. I have spent pages and pages asking you over and over to justify some claim to no avail. Do you remember your claim about some conference "voting" that Archy was "just a bird?" I asked you to support that claim and you just repeated it. I found a large number of papers presented at the conference and showed how the authors were actually treating Archy as a transitional. You completely ignored the data to refute your claim. But that did not stop you from repeating it over and over and over. Or look at your recent strawman on genetic testing of crocodiles, snakes and birds. You happily plagiarized what you thought supported you. But when I showed that the results actually confirmed a prediction of evolution, you never answered.

You posted pages of links to your script in your last round of posts. Never mind that I could provide a list of links where those constructs of yours have been smashed to bits and where you have repeatedly failed to offer a shred of support for your bald assertions. It would be a waste of time, however, to produce such. You will never listen and I really doubt we have too many lurkers left at this point and none who would follow dozens of links to other posts.

But you have continued to make it clear that you are not interested in debate. Well I have said the same things over and over and over that rip gaping holes into your scripted rants.

I am tired of your smoke and mirrors and lies and fallacies and plagiarism and childish taunts. You have nothing new to offer. You repeat the same sad things over and over without regard for how many times they have been shown to be false. You care nothing for the truth.

I hope you enjoy your delusions. And I suspect that you will rant some more about how I have fled debate and how I have no answers. But you know deep down that such boasts are false. You know deep down that you have no facts. You know deep down that you have no answers for the truth. You know deep down that your careful script is a shaky house of cards that has been repeatedly blown over.

And I know that even if you fail to admit your errors, that the case for YEism has been weakened by your posts. It has been so easy to show your errors, even if you fail to admit them. Your claims made through quote mining are so easy to show where you have blatantly and deliberately misrepresented the statements with you Patterson claims being the ultimate example; you arguing with a statement from the author himself that you are wrong. Your strawmen have been thoroughly exposed, even if you keep repeating them.

And I know that it is not just my view. Oh yes, I, too, get PMs. I, too, have heard from the lurkers. I have heard from those who are not brave enough to admit in front of such a hostile crowd that they accept the truth. You may not be able to veer from your script or admit when you have been shown to be wrong, but others can see it. So while you will go about with your schoolboy taunts and your hollow claims of victory, I know that I have been successful in using you as a case study in the dangers and the sandy foundation of YEism.

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW - if you can not be expected to deal in a compelling way (as in actually paying attention to the details of the discussion) with such simple and obvious issues as listed below --

How can you be taken seriously in discussion having more "unknowns" and "guesswork" as their substance?

You seem to miss this key point when you simply add a vaccuous response to the many challenges and many examples given of your "run away blunders".

 

[BobRyan]

Having already posted the many links that you are "continuing to ignore" and that are so devastating to your wild claims to "be successful anyway" -

Here is the list that summarized UTEOTW's failures so far

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Since you stated your intention to continue to run away from your OWN initiative on the Patterson thread (the thread you have been avoiding this entire time) -- perhaps a return to The topics of your failures on THIS thread --

-------------------------------

And then there is your totally discredited example of the 52 card sequence. Classic failure on your part -- thanks for creating that here for all to read - (Debunked many times on this thread - one of them being here - http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...7&postcount=61 )

YOU jumped off that cliff in an attempt to attack all of statistics and probability science as you attack the Nobel winning mathmatician Dr. Borel. Congrats on exposing yourself like that to the entire board!

Congrats on admitting that you have NO SOLUTION for the proteins needed to build the cell structures in the first cell!! You just "cling to BELIEF" in abiogenesis "anyway".

Congrats on resorting to blind attack tactics instead of dealing with the data presented here.

Congrats on ignoring the basic fact of Romans 1 as even FLEW was compelled to admit to the bogus myths and failed arguments of the atheist darwinists who way "there is NO GOD" and in service to that religion "imagine" stories about abiogenesis.

Congrats on your published opposition to Romans 1 on this board!!

You have done so well in your service to atheist darwinism here - no one can charge that you failed to fully represent them here EXCEPT when you twisted THEIR OWN statements about the failed, discredited horse series stated by them to be "ALL WRONG" and "NEVER happened in nature" and "HAD to be discardeD" and "LAMENTABLE" that it was still in text books -- you twisted that around to "YES but still nothing fundamentally WRONG with that " discredited and ALL WRONG story telling!!

Then of course we have you opposing the details in the TALK ORIGINS post about Patterson - where you failed to support your blind assertions about WHICH quote Patterson was ENDORSING!!

IF ONLY you had stood firm with your atheist darwinist masters THEN as well as you have in other areas you would not be quite as exposed as you are to this point. But as it is we have YOU creating gross failures of your own AND we have you opposing your OWN Atheist Darwinist masters making THEM to be the "voice of reason" when compared to you!!

Please consider crossing over to the light so that you don't have to go down dark blind alley after dark blind alley!

And then of course we have the primary blunder of abiogenesis SHOWN to not only be "impossible" from the standoint of statistical probability BUT ALSO SEEN on this thread to totally fail-by-default when it comes to the protein based structures and enzymes that MAKE UP all single celled creatures.

The idea that an RNA Molecule could be used in a "bait and switch" tactic of darwinist alchemists as a SUBSTITUTE for an actual living cell is a joke that UTEOTW never tires of telling.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob
And I know that it is not just my view. Oh yes, I, too, get PMs. I, too, have heard from the lurkers. I have heard from those who are not brave enough to admit in front of such a hostile crowd that they accept the truth. You may not be able to veer from your script or admit when you have been shown to be wrong, but others can see it. So while you will go about with your schoolboy taunts and your hollow claims of victory, I know that I have been successful in using you as a case study in the dangers and the sandy foundation of YEism.

Hmm - not A SINGLE response to even ONE of the links that were shown to fully debunk your wild claims.

How "predictable" in your resolute attempts to "rant and run".

But there is something incredibly embarrassing for all atheist darwinists here - UTEOTW is claiming that you ALL are running away from his blunders WITH HIM!!

You are ALL either claiming to fail to understand statistics RIGHT WHERE HE does, AND are ALL claiming to HOLD to fantastics contradictions such as "YES this IS ALL wrong but that does not mean there is anything FUNDAMENTALLY wrong with it".

UTEOTW puts you in his same boat IGNORING the Talk Origins AUTHOR of the letter TO Patterson as HE reports the LETTER FROM Patterson -- JUST like UTEOTW does??!!!

You ALL want to make those SAME claims AGAINST Romans 1 about the invisible attributes of God CLEARLY SEEN in the THINGS that have been made - by UNBLIEVING pagans -- and yet NOT seen (not even ONCE) by UTEOTW!!???

How can ALL of you sink to that same level??!!

I must say I am really surprised by UTEOTW's claim!! (And I would have said that NOTHING UTEOTW does would be a surprise any more -- prior to this wild claim!!)

I can see how ONE might talk himself that far out on a limb -- but EVERYONE ELSE in that atheist darwinist camp ALSO willingly choosing those SAME BLUNDERS??

Come on!

I just can't believe that! Surely you guys as a group could improve on that! I have had some negative things to say about the atheist darwinist club -- but I did not think that UTEOTW would be bold enough to claim that all of HIS blunders can be charged to you as well!

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW
You, on the other hand, have been empirically shown to not even read posts before returning to your scripted rants.

You, on the other hand, will flee from the facts if you can ever be brought near them. Look no further than your "banded iron" debacle on this very thread.

Here we have PROOF of UTEOTW's total lack of integrity.


UTEOTW thinks that he actually HAS a point with the basement rock argument!! (as bogus and flawed as it was shown to be). He even thinks it is MY FAULT that the Smithsonian displays an example of banded iron as basement rock. As goofy as that is (and what else do we expect from UTEOTW after all of this) he thinks he actually HAS a point. So thinking that - he keeps bringing it up.

(you know like I KEEP dragging up his 52 card blunder, his attack on Emile Borel, his attack on all of statistical science, his failure to admit that protein srtuctures are NEEDED for a successful abiogenesis "story", his failure to be honest with the Patterson Talk-Origins post, his published attempts to equivocate between "ALL WRONG" and "YES but nothing fundamentally wrong with it"..)


So now when we see his ONE case where he is not ashamed to keep coming back to what he view as "a point" and CONTRAST that with his "rant and run" tactic with Patterson - SURELY EVERY CHILD can see the difference!!


Will all of the atheist darwinist group here then quietly claim "yes we would fail and be transparently exposed in exactly that same way" as UTEOTW claims??

If so - I have to say guys - that is pretty amazing!!

 

[BobRyan]

It is "innescapable" fact that I have offerred link after link, thread after thread "reminder point after reminder point" and UTEOTW CAN NOT be brought to an attempt to rescue his failed arguments!!

He CAN not be brought to answer to the inconvenient details SHOWN to fully debunk his wild desperate arguments...

And sadly enough - this has been with simple, obvious easy examples where ALL the facts are clearly known -- HOW then could he be trusted to genuinely exchange views on topics that are not so well grounded in exhaustive fact!??

Answer: He can not.

 

[UTEOTW]

"Can't?"

Hello! I have thoroughly refuted every line in your script dozens of times. My posts fail at no level. They are thoroughly grounded in fact.

Since you generally ignore responses, if you even can be brought to read them, or at best twist the response into a strawman and knock that over instead, you may not have realized this.

But I see from your newest string of posts that I was right. You really have nothing new to offer beyond your discredited smoke and mirrors, deceptions, fallacies, childish taunts and plagiarism.

There is no hope that you will be persuaded from your delusions and you are interested only in repeating your disgraced script. I have successfully exposed every bit of your script as the work of fiction that it is. You cannot address the glaring problems with your script, you can only repeat the same things over and over. You are too afraid to venture into actual facts, so you hide behind things where you think you can successfully obfuscate the details.

Since you cannot be brought to give up your strawmen and other fallacies and deceptions, since you have no answer for the facts that have been put into play and since you have no interest in having a real debate, there is not much left to say. You do serve, however, as an excellent example of the bankruptcy of a YE position.

 

[BobRyan]

The problem is that IN NO CASE were you able to respond EVEN ONCE with a response that paid attention to detail or ANSWERED any of the glaring failures SHOWN to be in your position!!

SEE? HINT: Start reading here! http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=822073&postcount=164


The sad truth is that you "ran away" a long time ago - and being reminded of it - you find you are incapable of going to the links, looking at the data, answering the points, or reviving your dead failed arguments to a point of actual substantive recovery.

Your repeated empty vaccuous claims that some time in the past you might have actually done something substantive - does NOT hold true in the case of those links.

Obviously.

As has been pointed out - your silly antics when you 'Want to run" were held up IN CONTRAST to your behavior when you actually think you have a point.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=822939&postcount=174

--

Ok so nothing new in your tactics there.

But what is incredibly facinating and new - is the degree to which you think that fellow atheist darwinist believers would fail just as blatantly on all those links as you did!!

That is the part in your many failed positions that even I find amazing!!

 

[BobRyan]

Bob

You just don't get it.

It is not possible to have a rational debate with you.

At some point you need to be honest and admit to the obvious when you are running away from your OWN arguments!!

I have shown your lack of substantive response being weeks old on these threads.

The interesting thing is that you DO start with some substantive argument - some proposal, some accusation that is then proven to be totally bogus - afterwhich you slide back into "rant and run" mode and we never get another coherent word from you.

Why do you do that?

I told you in my last post that you had said nothing new and that my previous post was still sufficient to cover everything you had said.

Except where you FAILED to cover your own attacks on the Mathmatician Emile Borel.

Except where you FAILED to cover your 52 card blunder where you denied ALL Of PROBABILITY SCIENCE and declared that statistics says it is impossible to deal a deck of 52 cards!!! A more glaring failure on your part can hardly be IMAGINED!!

Except the part where you FAILED to address the DETAILS in your own selected baseless attack using Patterson only to have Talk Origins DEBUNK your wild "gloss-over" of all detail and fact!

But of course - "that is nothing new" and is pointed out in triplicate in those links.

 

[BobRyan]

I told you that I have tired of beating my head against the wall with you.

You did tell the truth on that part.

Congrats!

Try substantive responses to the points raised instead of your "rant-and-run" as if ranting and then running is "doing something".

So when you FAILED to show that abiogenesis can exist WITHOUT actually showing how a LIVING CELL can be formed - when you FAILED to show how strans of RNA could BECOME a living cell -- when you FAILED to show that LIFE as we know it should not be composed of LIVING CELLS that do not REQUIRE CELL STRUCTURES and enzymes, then all these "failures" simply pile up!

When you totally exposed your failed positions by claiming that when your atheist darwinist masters admit that the discredited horse series was "ALL WRONG" and "NEVER happened in nature" -- EVEN THEN you would have to say "YES maybe so but still nothing fundamentally wrong with it" -- you let ALL see just how far your desperate arguments would sink.

So - no wonder you would merely "rant and run" instead of mustering a substantive attempt to rescue your failed arguments!!

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW

You, on the other hand, will flee from the facts if you can ever be brought near them. Look no further than your "banded iron" debacle on this very thread.

... Do you remember your claim about some conference "voting" that Archy was "just a bird?" I asked you to support that claim and you just repeated it. I found a large number of papers presented at the conference and showed how the authors were actually treating Archy as a transitional. You completely ignored the data to refute your claim.

First of all - I will grant you this - both of the examples that you give above are cases where your argument "Still has play" - it was debunked - but not totally devastated as the examples I just gave you where you argument totally ran aground so you simply run from it.

Basically it is OBVIOUS the change in tactic that you take when an argument of yours still has some life in it - vs these total failures of yours that I have highlighted here.

Your tactic when your view has been totally debunked is to "rant and run" so I AM THE ONE that has to keep dragging you BACK to the point of your own failed initiatives.

By CONTRAST - in the two cases above - your argument has not completely run aground - so YOU seek to drag me back to it.

In the case of banded Iron - I gave some hints as to where your failure would be exposed - but I have deliberately left some life in that - so that you could continue to demonstrate to all but the determinedly-blind just how DIFFERENT your approach is when you believe some part of your argument still has life left in it.

UTEOTW

But that did not stop you from repeating it over and over and over. Or look at your recent strawman on genetic testing of crocodiles, snakes and birds. You happily plagiarized what you thought supported you. But when I showed that the results actually confirmed a prediction of evolution, you never answered.

Sounds interesting - start a thread instead of derailing this one.


.

UTEOTW

And I know that even if you fail to admit your errors, that the case for YEism has been weakened by your posts. It has been so easy to show your errors, even if you fail to admit them. Your claims made through quote mining are so easy to show where you have blatantly and deliberately misrepresented the statements with you Patterson claims being the ultimate example;

How sad that after FAILING to deal with even a paultry amount of truth and detail on that topic -- you want to ASSUME your victory instead of showing it as you CONTINUE to run away from the thread DEDICATED to allowing you to make your point in that slanderous argument above!!

How sad that this is an example where I try to DRAG YOU back to the discussion and you keep "ranting and running" with vaccuous claim after vaccuous claim as in the case of the above. If you really HAD interest in that you would go to the RECENT thread GIVEN to you for just that purpose and ANSWER the devastating case that was just made against your failed argument there!!

UTEOTW

you arguing with a statement from the author himself that you are wrong.

Cease "dreaming" your success - and GO there and SHOW it in the details!!