Origin :) the numbers

@kellyjay said
I didn’t think the video criticism you gave was just either.

Can you explain why?

@stellspalfie said
Can you explain why?

You were accusing it of being something more than a hypothetical display thereby saying these people didn't know what they were talking about. You do something similar and act as if you did nothing wrong.

@kellyjay said
You were accusing it of being something more than a hypothetical display thereby saying these people didn't know what they were talking about. You do something similar and act as if you did nothing wrong.

Did you understand what I was saying?

@stellspalfie said
Did you understand what I was saying?

You understand what I was saying?

@kellyjay said
You understand what I was saying?

Not in your last 4 or 5 posts.

Did you understand why I gave you the example of magnets?

@stellspalfie said
Not in your last 4 or 5 posts.

Did you understand why I gave you the example of magnets?

You made claims about them forming, which you didn't go into details. You did not say how this process started in the first place. You cannot have a process of overcoming such odds without directions guiding the procedure. So, you want to suggest the odds are overcome by what, some sort of design? Was this natural process that started creating specific proteins in the beginning of life from non-life, the very first thing that happen at abio-genesis? Seems to me that all you are doing is looking at current known processes, an attributing them to the beginning, but suggesting these things were still true going back in time to the very beginning. You are doing this without saying why or how, you are long on dissent when things don't agree with your world view, and you are most short of details when explaining how you thinks done at the beginning. Please notice this threads title, we are not talking about how proteins are made now!

@kellyjay said
You made claims about them forming, which you didn't go into details. You did not say how this process started in the first place. You cannot have a process of overcoming such odds without directions guiding the procedure. So, you want to suggest the odds are overcome by what, some sort of design? Was this natural process that started creating specific proteins in the beginn ...[text shortened]... the beginning. Please notice this threads title, we are not talking about how proteins are made now!

All I am claiming is that the science in your video is wrong. I have provided you with the reasons why it is wrong.
There is obviously lots of debates to be had about the beginning of organic material on Earth, we can have that debate if you wish.
But the fact that the science in your Origin video is bogus will always remain true - and that is the main crux of my argument.

@stellspalfie said
All I am claiming is that the science in your video is wrong. I have provided you with the reasons why it is wrong.
There is obviously lots of debates to be had about the beginning of organic material on Earth, we can have that debate if you wish.
But the fact that the science in your Origin video is bogus will always remain true - and that is the main crux of my argument.

You think that the structure is being misrepresented so that when they say there are left handed and right handed amino acids they are in error, and that only left handed acids connected to left handed acids are in life is an error? This being the reason for saying part of the odds are 1/2 when looking at a proteins structure?

You have issues with what? So far you’re not telling me anything outside you dislike the theoretical video. It was not there to show anyone how they are made, but to illustrate the problem in terms of what had to be overcome.

You want to address that with by saying something easily overcomes those odds, but never saying anything about the specific mechanics of your protein manufacturing apparatus, saying how at the beginning this did it.

You say it’s wrong without saying what is right!

@kellyjay said
You think that the structure is being misrepresented so that when they say there are left handed and right handed amino acids they are in error, and that only left handed acids connected to left handed acids are in life is an error? This being the reason for saying part of the odds are 1/2 when looking at a proteins structure?

You have issues with what? So far you’re not ...[text shortened]... aratus, saying how at the beginning this did it.

You say it’s wrong without saying what is right!

I'm telling you stuff...you just aint listening.

For example, the probability calculation in your video is based on RANDOMLY forming proteins....proteins do not form randomly.

Do you accept my point or have an issue with it? If so why?

@stellspalfie said
I'm telling you stuff...you just aint listening.

For example, the probability calculation in your video is based on RANDOMLY forming proteins....proteins do not form randomly.

Do you accept my point or have an issue with it? If so why?

I don’t care how you suggest that are put together today! At the beginning what mechanism did it, what directed the process if it wasn’t random when life first formed, if proteins were not at the beginning what formed them if not an undirected natural process when they did appear? You have to have an explanation for saying something is wrong, what is right?

@kellyjay said
I don’t care how you suggest that are put together today! At the beginning what mechanism did it, what directed the process if it wasn’t random when life first formed, if proteins were not at the beginning what formed them if not an undirected natural process when they did appear? You have to have an explanation for saying something is wrong, what is right?

So you don't care if the science in your video is right or wrong.

@stellspalfie said
So you don't care if the science in your video is right or wrong.

You can not tell me it is wrong if you don’t know what is right!

@kellyjay said
You can not tell me it is wrong if you don’t know what is right!

That statement is borderline nuts, but I'll play along.


How can the men in the video (and yourself) know what is right, if you don't know what is wrong.

@stellspalfie said
That statement is borderline nuts, but I'll play along.


How can the men in the video (and yourself) know what is right, if you don't know what is wrong.

I am not begging you to believe anything out of time and space! You are also not playing along because you have again criticized without supporting your views. The only thing I have said is given the properties of a protein considering the placement of the variables here are the odds.

The odds are the same no matter how it is put together. The odds of a coin flip is 1/2, and by flipping it remains 1/2. Me placing a coin on heads removes the random nature but not the odds of the coins.

You are again steep in complaints sort on justification for those complaints. Avoiding answering my questions for your reasoning makes me wonder if you have any idea what you are talking about!

@kellyjay said
I am not begging you to believe anything out of time and space! You are also not playing along because you have again criticized without supporting your views. The only thing I have said is given the properties of a protein considering the placement of the variables here are the odds.

The odds are the same no matter how it is put together. The odds of a coin flip is 1/2, ...[text shortened]... ing my questions for your reasoning makes me wonder if you have any idea what you are talking about!

I've explained several times why the probability calculated in the video is wrong.

I'll repeat one of my explanations and you can specifically tell me what you don't accept about it - Part of the videos calculation is based on the wrong assumption that the protein forms RANDOMLY. Proteins do not form RANDOMLY. This makes their calculation wrong.

Over to you.