Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2001 20:29:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1421 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
> Actually, the Drake Equation has nothing to do with the chance of life
> evolving. It only has to do with the chance of communication with it
> (another life) given that one assumes a factor for the chance that is does
> evolve.
Okay, but it seems to me that life must evolve into existence before it
can be considered likely to communicate with us, so I still think the Drake
equation gives a useful model. Especially since the number of intelligent
species must by definition be less than or equal to the total number of
species, so that we may infer a larger number of total species in the
universe than the Drake predicts us potentially to contact.
> Life can't evolve. (or at least 1 in 10^50)
Once again, I ask that you provide a citation for that vanishingly small
number. Otherwise, I assert with equal confidence that a Supreme Being
can't exist (or at least not an absolute Supreme Being).
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) I very much appreciate having someone attempt disproof - Thanks! Actually, the Drake Equation has nothing to do with the chance of life evolving. It only has to do with the chance of communication with it (another life) given that one assumes (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
