I have developed a basic science questionaire to assess the scientific knowledge of some of my evolution critics on this forum. This is not by any means exhausive and is only intended to assist the true seeker-after knowledge to gauge themselve against mainstream scientific benchmarks. Feel free to add you own questions or suggest any improvements.


1-) What is the speed of light? How long does it take the light from the sun to reach the earth?
2-) What is the difference between a theory and a hypothesis in the scientific sense?
3-) What is the germ theory of disease, the theory of gravity?
4-) What are stromatolites?
5-) How old is the earth?
6-) What is the end-permian extinction and what proportion of life went extinct during this event?
7-) How long ago were dinosaurs wiped out?
8-) What are asteroid impact of the earth?
9-) Can you give a rough estimate of the number of stars in our galaxy, the Milky Way?
10-) Do you know what chromosomes and DNA are. Can you name any "genetic disease"?
11-) On the whole, do you think science and technology provides solutions to human problems?
12-) Have you ever visted a museum?
13-) What are fossils?
14-) What is the geological column?
15-) What is the theory of plate tectonic?
16-) How is petroleum fuel formed and how long is the process?
17-) What do you classify as natural and supernatural events?
18-) In the event of a medical emergency would you rather rush to a scientific medical institution or a supernaturalist?
19-) What are Neandarthal?
20-) What is a supernova?

c

tpaine:
I have developed a basic science questionaire to assess the scientific knowledge of some of my evolution critics on this forum. This is not by any means exhausive and is only intended to assist the true seeker-after knowledge to gauge themselve against mainstream scientific benchmarks. Feel free to add you own questions or suggest any improvements.


1-) What is the speed of light? How long does it take the light from the sun to reach the earth?
2-) What is the difference between a theory and a hypothesis in the scientific sense?
3-) What is the germ theory of disease, the theory of gravity?
4-) What are stromatolites?
5-) How old is the earth?
6-) What is the end-permian extinction and what proportion of life went extinct during this event?
7-) How long ago were dinosaurs wiped out?
8-) What are asteroid impact of the earth?
9-) Can you give a rough estimate of the number of stars in our galaxy, the Milky Way?
10-) Do you know what chromosomes and DNA are. Can you name any "genetic disease"?
11-) On the whole, do you think science and technology provides solutions to human problems?
12-) Have you ever visted a museum?
13-) What are fossils?
14-) What is the geological column?
15-) What is the theory of plate tectonic?
16-) How is petroleum fuel formed and how long is the process?
17-) What do you classify as natural and supernatural events?
18-) In the event of a medical emergency would you rather rush to a scientific medical institution or a supernaturalist?
19-) What are Neandarthal?
20-) What is a supernova?

21) How did humans become so intelligent?
22) Where are the boundaries of the universe?
23) What exists beyond those boundaries?
24) To what extend can sub-atomic particles be further divided?

Imhotep

I said BASIC question. The sort of questions a high-school graduate majoring in science would be expected to answer. The questions you just added are way, way beyond basic. I would reserve those for some other forum.

Thankx

tpaine
u asked for questions and u got questions then y are u shying away instead of answering them. Evolutionist like u

@tpaine
If you intend to face reality , then face ALL of reality. Not just the portions that are agreeable to you.

21) How did humans become so intelligent?
22) Where are the boundaries of the universe?
23) What exists beyond those boundaries?
24) To what extend can sub-atomic particles be further divided?

The fact is that these are not basic questions. These are not questions about which anyone knows the answer. If you got answer to them, send them to me. Then I shall add them to the list of questions. I did not intend to put unanswerable questions to the list, but if you have solid acceptable answers, send them to me and I shall have them check by my tutor. Once that is authenticated I shall include them.

DEAL?

tpaine:

21) How did humans become so intelligent?
22) Where are the boundaries of the universe?
23) What exists beyond those boundaries?
24) To what extend can sub-atomic particles be further divided?

The fact is that these are not basic questions. These are not questions about which anyone knows the answer. If you got answer to them, send them to me. Then I shall add them to the list of questions. I did not intend to put unanswerable questions to the list, but if you have solid acceptable answers, send them to me and I shall have them check by my tutor. Once that is authenticated I shall include them.

DEAL?

@tpaine
No deal. Since we are all scientists, let us tackle these questions head on.

Well, you may have answers but I am not competent to assess their quality and reliability. Scientists work in communities. I belong to a community of scientists who might well be able to cast a more competent light on it than me (or you).

If you have no answers, the questions simply would be added.

tpaine:

Well, you may have answers but I am not competent to assess their quality and reliability. Scientists work in communities. I belong to a community of scientists who might well be able to cast a more competent light on it than me (or you).

If you have no answers, the questions simply would be added.

@tpaine
These questions are highly scientific. Don't dodge them.

imhotep:

@tpaine.
These questions are highly scientific. Don't dodge them.

Not all scientific questions have answers. Sicence is not a dogma, as religion is. That is the mistake u are making.

If you can supply the answers I shall add them to the list

tpaine:

Not all scientific questions have answers. Sicence is not a dogma, as religion is. That is the mistake u are making.

If you can supply the answers I shall add them to the list

@tpaine
There is nothing religious about those questions.

imhotep:

@tpaine
There is nothing religious about those questions.

You are thrashing about again. Did I say they were religious? I said not all scientific questions currently have answers.

tpaine:

You are thrashing about again. Did I say they were religious? I said not all scientific questions currently have answers.

@tpaine
Then attempt to answer the questions using your scientific methods.

I do not know the answer. Supply me with the answers and I will add them up.

tpaine:

I do not know the answer. Supply me with the answers and I will add them up.

@tpaine
Good. Why not add them to your research topics. Then realize that science has its limits.

imhotep:

@tpaine
Good. Why not add them to your research topics. Then realize that science has its limits.

Do you even have a inkling of the answers? Do you really care?

KAG:

Do you even have a inkling of the answers? Do you really care?

Yes, I'm very much interested in the answers.

imhotep:

Yes, I'm very much interested in the answers.

Considering i've given you brief answers to two of the questions, and based on your past habit of not even seeming to read answers given to questions youve asked, I don't believe you.

KAG:

Considering i've given you brief answers to two of the questions, and based on your past habit of not even seeming to read answers given to questions youve asked, I don't believe you.

@KAG
The only one I remember is on the question of human intelligence - where you said it was due to some structures (or some chemical reactions, I think) in the human brain.

I don't take that to be a satisfactory answer, though. Its like saying we can see just because we have eyes ------ but dead men have eyes too and cannot see.

imhotep:

@KAG
The only one I remember is on the question of human intelligence - where you said it was due to some structures (or some chemical reactions, I think) in the human brain.

It might help if you reviewed the question you asked and the answer I gave

I don't take that to be a satisfactory answer, though. Its like saying we can see just because we have eyes ------ but dead men have eyes too and cannot see.

um, no it isn't. Dead humans can have brains too, but obviously my response was more than just "well they have brains so they intelligent."

The other question that was answered is the one on subatomic particles. The answer is in my response to the question on the probable origins of matter.

In conclusion, like I said, I don't believe you when you say you care for an answer.

And to answer all your questions - do you not think somebody calculated all these physical phenomenom such as the force of gravity, the speed of light, the distance of the earth from the sun, the atomic mass of the sun - do you not think that somebody calculated all these things before he made the earth - surely, you are not too stupid to think that they occur randomly. This is only the physical level, not to mention the subconscious and mental level - face it, God is the greatest scientist.

Ibime:

And to answer all your questions - do you not think somebody calculated all these physical phenomenom such as the force of gravity, the speed of light, the distance of the earth from the sun, the atomic mass of the sun - do you not think that somebody calculated all these things before he made the earth - surely, you are not too stupid to think that they occur randomly. This is only the physical level, not to mention the subconscious and mental level - face it, God is the greatest scientist.

In that case, why has humanity been immersed in ignorance, stupidity, illness, and suffering almost all of humanity when the knowledge to cure all these ills exists in god? If he is so clever and powerful why does he not just fix the world he could not get right in the first place. Ah, I forgot that he enjoys seeing us suffer and die as he gets a great deal of satisfaction from that.

tpaine:

In that case, why has humanity been immersed in ignorance, stupidity, illness, and suffering almost all of humanity when the knowledge to cure all these ills exists in god? If he is so clever and powerful why does he not just fix the world he could not get right in the first place. Ah, I forgot that he enjoys seeing us suffer and die as he gets a great deal of satisfaction from that.

Jesus said there will always be poor.

What is your point? You haven't answered the question. If you say you believe in God but not the Christian God, I would have no wahala with you. However, you have not explained why all these carefully calculated measurements that allow life on the earth exist - can you verify that all these precise forces and measurements are all down to random occurences? Answer the question and stop dillydallying.

Look, the fact is that we were all put here by someone. Creation is proof of a creator just as much as a cake is proof of a baker. Only a fool says in his heart that there is no God. Whether or not he is the Christian God or not is irrelevant. Everybody just serves him in the different ways they know how.

Ibime:

Jesus said there will always be poor.

What is your point? You haven't answered the question. If you say you believe in God but not the Christian God, I would have no wahala with you. However, you have not explained why all these carefully calculated measurements that allow life on the earth exist - can you verify that all these precise forces and measurements are all down to random occurences? Answer the question and stop dillydallying.

Look, the fact is that we were all put here by someone. Creation is proof of a creator just as much as a cake is proof of a baker. Only a fool says in his heart that there is no God. Whether or not he is the Christian God or not is irrelevant. Everybody just serves him in the different ways they know how.

Well, this is called the fine-tuning argument (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/tuning.html), which basically states that most of the physical parameters are tuned to enable life on earth and the this universe was created with us in mind. Well just consider the following;

The universie about 14 billion years old and extremely extremely extremely vast. Only in our own galaxy, the Milk Way, there are 100 billion stars and more that 100 billion galaxies in the universe. So how significant is the earth is this infinitesimally small speck in the universe? Our earth is so tiny that even in our own galaxy, if the earth were to disappear, it will cause but a tiny ripple in the structure of the galaxy.

Of all the vastness in the universe, how much of this is conducive to human life? How much of the surface of the earth is conducive to life? In view of the fact that life cannot be sustained in the overwhelming majority of the universe, how can it be claimed that this vast universe was created with us in mind. How do you account for all the wasted matter, supernovae, blackhole, pulsar, galactic collisions that would distroy all life in an instant. In fact, our nearest galactic neighbour, Andromeda is hurtling towards us, the Milky Way and is bound for collision at some point into the future. This will almost certainly destroy all life on earth, if it has not already been destroyed by the inflation of the sun.

The earth is only about 4 billion years old. So the universe must have been around for about 10 billions years before our earth was formed. Why would god wait for that long to create his special creature? And only to destroy them again with solar inflation of galactic collision?

The fact is that the fine-tuning argument is a red-herring in the debate. It appears as though all was fine tuned for life. However, life exploited the "accidental finely tuned " universe and adapted itself to it.

Further, it has been shown by some cosmologist (Victor Stenger et al) that the so-called finely tuned parameters are not in fact as finely tuned as claimed. Studies have shown that a similar universe like the current one would still have formed for quite a wide range of the so-called finely tuned parameters.

tpaine:

The universie about 14 billion years old and extremely extremely extremely vast. Only in our own galaxy, the Milk Way, there are 100 billion stars and more that 100 billion galaxies in the universe. So how significant is the earth is this infinitesimally small speck in the universe? Our earth is so tiny that even in our own galaxy, if the earth were to disappear, it will cause but a tiny ripple in the structure of the galaxy.

Of all the vastness in the universe, how much of this is conducive to human life? How much of the surface of the earth is conducive to life? In view of the fact that life cannot be sustained in the overwhelming majority of the universe, how can it be claimed that this vast universe was created with us in mind. How do you account for all the wasted matter, supernovae, blackhole, pulsar, galactic collisions that would distroy all life in an instant.

yada yada yada -  You cannot use probability to try to explain away the reason for the existence of life on earth. I know the usual argument - yes out of all these billions of planets and yada yada yada, by basic probability, it just so happens that earth is condusive for human and animal life - RUBBISH!

ALL OF IT was created. Have you been to any of those 100 billion planets to check if there is life or not before you bring your stupid argument? I believe there is. Our Holy books only tell us about earth. Abi you want a religious text to be a million pages detailing every step in the creation of life before you believe?

Simple logic tells you that everything is made. You cannot see something which is carefully constructed such as a table or chair and question whether somebody made it or not. How much more the planets in their perfect alignment, with all their moons perfectly made to reflect light from the sun and to order the tides of their seas. With all their seasons. Everything is PERFECTLY made - by a superior and intelligent being - infinitely more intelligent than your Hawkins and Dawkins who you follow so closely - having eyes, yet not being able to see - being intelligent, yet a fool in the most basic of things.

As for the earth, the Bible says "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and Earth - The earth was without form and void and the Spirit of the Lord hovered over the Earth"

The bible does not give a chronological order of things. Nor does it tell you the length of time between the 'beginning' and the creation of man. Nor does it tell you if there if there was a previous project here on earth. Yes, I believe God carries out projects - not only on earth but in other galaxies and solar systems. The Bible does not say that man was created immediately after the earth was. Nor does it specifically state that we were the first life forms on earth. God had other projects here before this current one. And yes - that included Dinosaurs.

I am not here to defend the Bible. Even I notice that there are irregularities in the Bible - just as I know that there are many assumptions in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins. Infact, there are so many 'assumptions' in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins that they would be thrown out of any science class - except in the area of evolution. And that is what you choose to believe?

Let us deal with lemma's, not assumptions - and the only lemma I know is this - Something is not created from nothing. Creation is proof of a creator.

If you choose to argue about any of the major religions, that is a different matter. But do not be so stupid as to argue that there is no God.

Ibime:


yada yada yada - You cannot use probability to try to explain away the reason for the existence of life on earth. I know the usual argument - yes out of all these billions of planets and yada yada yada, by basic probability, it just so happens that earth is condusive for human and animal life - RUBBISH!

ALL OF IT was created. Have you been to any of those 100 billion planets to check if there is life or not before you bring your stupid argument? I believe there is. Our Holy books only tell us about earth. Abi you want a religious text to be a million pages detailing every step in the creation of life before you believe?

Simple logic tells you that everything is made. You cannot see something which is carefully constructed such as a table or chair and question whether somebody made it or not. How much more the planets in their perfect alignment, with all their moons perfectly made to reflect light from the sun and to order the tides of their seas. With all their seasons. Everything is PERFECTLY made - by a superior and intelligent being - infinitely more intelligent than your Hawkins and Dawkins who you follow so closely - having eyes, yet not being able to see - being intelligent, yet a fool in the most basic of things.

As for the earth, the Bible says "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and Earth - The earth was without form and void and the Spirit of the Lord hovered over the Earth"

The bible does not give a chronological order of things. Nor does it tell you the length of time between the 'beginning' and the creation of man. Nor does it tell you if there if there was a previous project here on earth. Yes, I believe God carries out projects - not only on earth but in other galaxies and solar systems. The Bible does not say that man was created immediately after the earth was. Nor does it specifically state that we were the first life forms on earth. God had other projects here before this current one. And yes - that included Dinosaurs.

I am not here to defend the Bible. Even I notice that there are irregularities in the Bible - just as I know that there are many assumptions in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins. Infact, there are so many 'assumptions' in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins that they would be thrown out of any science class - except in the area of evolution. And that is what you choose to believe?

Let us deal with lemma's, not assumptions - and the only lemma I know is this - Something is not created from nothing. Creation is proof of a creator.

If you choose to argue about any of the major religions, that is a different matter. But do not be so stupid as to argue that there is no God.

My goodness. This amount inanity is beyond belief.

Ibime:

yada yada yada - You cannot use probability to try to explain away the reason for the existence of life on earth. I know the usual argument - yes out of all these billions of planets and yada yada yada, by basic probability, it just so happens that earth is condusive for human and animal life - RUBBISH!

You ureally need to educate yourself. Probability is a rigorous tool in science to determine the likelihood of events. You may not know this but almost every activity has a probabilistic component, where absolute certainty does not exist.

Ibime:

Simple logic tells you that everything is made. You cannot see something which is carefully constructed such as a table or chair and question whether somebody made it or not. How much more the planets in their perfect alignment, with all their moons perfectly made to reflect light from the sun and to order the tides of their seas. With all their seasons. Everything is PERFECTLY made - by a superior and intelligent being - infinitely more intelligent than your Hawkins and Dawkins who you follow so closely - having eyes, yet not being able to see - being intelligent, yet a fool in the most basic of things.

Who said there was no "creation". There certainly was a creation event - the question is was this event natural or supernatural. It has been demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the BIG BANG created the universe. Our current understanding does not go beyond the Big Bang. The BB created events that later created the matter you see around you today. The total sum energy of the universe is zero. Given that matter and energy are interchangeable (from E=mc2), the matter in the universe was created out of energy. All the matter we have is equally matched by a net negative matter(energy), thus restoring the zero-equilibrium state of the universe. (Victor Stenger)

You fail to appreciate that science is NOT "gospel". The likes of Hawkins, Einstein, etc may discover theories about the universe which fit the observed fact. But that does not make their theories invulnerable to challenge. If a new theory comes along that fits the fact better, the old theory is replaced by the better one. Rarely do you see such corrective measures in the religious dogmas which you favour.

If everything was created perfect as you claim, how do you account for all the evil and disasters that claim millions of lives yearly. Is that perfection to you. An asteroid strikes the earth and kills millions - was that a perfect creation? There are millions of people today who suffer from AIDS, malaria, cancers etc - was that a perfect creation.

Who said we have to be on location of the subject to do science. Obviously it helps if your subject is contained is sitting next to you, but failing that science has developed methods of remote detecting and performing experiments. For instance, it is known that the sun is made primarily of helium and hydrogen, but noone ever venture as far as the sun. We also know that the sun could not sustain life. How do we know that. How do we know that Jupiter could not sustain live? ; that a blackhole would be lethal to life? that a planet made up entirely of nitrogen would not sustain life; that the space above our own planet is lethal to life?

Ibime:

As for the earth, the Bible says "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and Earth - The earth was without form and void and the Spirit of the Lord hovered over the Earth"

The bible does not give a chronological order of things. Nor does it tell you the length of time between the 'beginning' and the creation of man. Nor does it tell you if there if there was a previous project here on earth. Yes, I believe God carries out projects - not only on earth but in other galaxies and solar systems. The Bible does not say that man was created immediately after the earth was. Nor does it specifically state that we were the first life forms on earth. God had other projects here before this current one. And yes - that included Dinosaurs.

You don't even know your bible. What a shame. In fact, I am not surprise. Most christian don't even read the damn book. Just as well, for it might get them thinking, that is if they have any brain cells left unaddled by religious pillaging.

I will have you know - the bible gives a chronological order of the creation in Gen 1 & 2; The on the first day, on the second day, on the third day etc. With god doing different things on different days.

According to Gen 1, your inept god did not make the sun until the fourth day. How would one have days and night if there was no sun until the 4th day. The earth is held in its orbit by the gravitational attraction of the sun. What was holding the earth in place before god created the sun. Plants were created before the sun was created, and we know that plants need the sun to photosynthesise. How did the plant survive before the sun was created. This all sounds by mythology to me and any thinking person.

Even worse, the creation chronology in Gen 1 and 2 and contradiction. Could god not even get the order in which he created the world right in a simple 1000 word document?

Your stuff about God'd other project - where did you get that information from? Is that in the bible? I want chapter and verse.

Ibime:

I am not here to defend the Bible. Even I notice that there are irregularities in the Bible - just as I know that there are many assumptions in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins. Infact, there are so many 'assumptions' in the work of Darwin, Hawkins and Dawkins that they would be thrown out of any science class - except in the area of evolution. And that is what you choose to believe?

I would like to see you refutations of their work. Or better still the assumptions you state are in their work. In fact, do you know the meaning of the word assumption? Does an assumption mean a false proposition?

Have you heard of Chromosome no 2. ?
Do you know what the end-permian extinction even is?

Go educate yourself before you expose your ignorance again out in public.

tpaine:

You ureally need to educate yourself. Probability is a rigorous tool in science to determine the likelihood of events. You may not know this but almost every activity has a probabilistic component, where absolute certainty does not exist.

I can tell you that the probability that earth was created by random events is ABSOLUTELY ZERO. I am a Mathematician, so please don't preach to me about probability.

tpaine:

Who said there was no "creation". There certainly was a creation event - the question is was this event natural or supernatural. It has been demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the BIG BANG created the universe. Our current understanding does not go beyond the Big Bang. The BB created events that later created the matter you see around you today. The total sum energy of the universe is zero. Given that matter and energy are interchangeable (from E=mc2), the matter in the universe was created out of energy. All the matter we have is equally matched by a net negative matter(energy), thus restoring the zero-equilibrium state of the universe. (Victor Stenger)
.

The Bib Bang theory is absolutely that - A THEORY - based on many many assumptions, at every step. All this E = mc2 you are quoting and all this matter and anti-matter, who do you think you are impressing?

tpaine:

You fail to appreciate that science is NOT "gospel". The likes of Hawkins, Einstein, etc may discover theories about the universe which fit the observed fact. But that does not make their theories invulnerable to challenge. If a new theory comes along that fits the fact better, the old theory is replaced by the better one. Rarely do you see such corrective measures in the religious dogmas which you favour,

EXACTLY!

tpaine:

If everything was created perfect as you claim, how do you account for all the evil and disasters that claim millions of lives yearly. Is that perfection to you. An asteroid strikes the earth and kills millions - was that a perfect creation? There are millions of people today who suffer from AIDS, malaria, cancers etc - was that a perfect creation,

Why are you so angry at God?

tpaine:

According to Gen 1, your inept god did not make the sun until the fourth day. How would one have days and night if there was no sun until the 4th day. The earth is held in its orbit by the gravitational attraction of the sun. What was holding the earth in place before god created the sun. Plants were created before the sun was created, and we know that plants need the sun to photosynthesise. How did the plant survive before the sun was created. This all sounds by mythology to me and any thinking person,

The Bible said "God said let there be light" - it did not say nothing about the sun. You do not know if the earth at the time was covered by some kind of gas like Jupiter and some of the other planets.


Anyway, I don finish. Ne need to waste my time discussing nonsense with you. Maybe you are Professor Emeritus - or just someone with too much time on their hands. Whatever it is, let us just agree to disagree.

I can tell you that the probability that earth was created by random events is ABSOLUTELY ZERO. I am a Mathematician, so please don't preach to me about probability.

interesting, i see u being a mathematician makes u a great statistician. can u pls show us the calculations that lead u to this probability??

Ibime:

I can tell you that the probability that earth was created by random events is ABSOLUTELY ZERO. I am a Mathematician, so please don't preach to me about probability.

Absolutely zero? You're not a very good mathematician, are you?

KAG:

Absolutely zero? You're not a very good mathematician, are you?

bawomolo:

interesting, i see u being a mathematician makes u a great statistician. can u please show us the calculations that lead u to this probability??

Here is your probability.

Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters ≈ 10-388

dependency factors estimate ≈ 10-96

longevity requirements estimate ≈ 1014

Probability for occurrence of all 322 parameters ≈ 10-304

Maximum possible number of life support bodies in universe ≈ 1022

Thus, less than 1 chance in 10282(million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion)

SO - TO HOW MANY DECIMAL PLACES WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ROUND UP BEFORE YOU AGREE THAT IT IS ABSOLUTELY ZERO?

Foolishness knows no bounds - anyway, below is how it is calculated if you care to waste your time. I don comot for this discussion because it is utterly pointless.



Parameter Probability that feature will fall in the required range for physical life

local abundance and distribution of dark matter                                                                          0.1

relative abundances of different exotic mass  particles                                                               0.01

decay rates of different exotic mass particles                                                                             0.05

density of quasars                                                                                                                        0.1

density of giant galaxies in the early universe                                                                              0.1

galaxy cluster size                                                                                                                        0.1

galaxy cluster density                                                                                                                   0.1

galaxy cluster location                                                                                                                  0.1

galaxy size                                                                                                                                    0.1

galaxy type                                                                                                                                   0.1

galaxy mass distribution                                                                                                               0.2

size of galactic central bulge                                                                                                         0.2

galaxy location                                                                                                                              0.1

variability of local dwarf galaxy absorption rate                                                                            0.1

quantity of galactic dust                                                                                                                0.1

giant star density in galaxy                                                                                                           0.1

frequency of gamma ray bursts in galaxy                                                                                     0.05

star location relative to galactic center                                                                                         0.2

star distance from corotation circle of galaxy                                                                               0.005

ratio of inner dark halo mass to stellar mass for galaxy                                                                0.1

star distance from closest spiral arm                                                                                             0.1

z-axis extremes of star’s orbit                                                                                                      0.02

proximity of solar nebula to a normal type I supernova eruption                                                 0.01

timing of solar nebula formation relative to a normal type I supernova eruption                         0.01

proximity of solar nebula to a type II supernova eruption                                                           0.01

timing of solar nebula formation relative to type II supernova eruption                                      0.01

timing of hypernovae eruptions                                                                                                     0.2

number of hypernovae eruptions                                                                                                  0.1

masses of stars that become hypernovae                                                                                    0.1

flux of cosmic ray protons                                                                                                             0.1

variability of cosmic ray proton flux                                                                                               0.1
gas dispersal rate by companion stars, shock waves, and molecular cloud expansion in the Sun’s birthing star cluster 0.1

number of stars in birthing cluster                                                                                               0.01
star formation rate in parent star vicinity during history of that star 0.1
variation in star formation rate in parent star vicinity during history of that star 0.1
birth date of the star-planetary system 0.01
number of stars in system 0.7
number and timing of close encounters by nearby stars 0.01
proximity of close stellar encounters 0.1
masses of close stellar encounters 0.1
density of brown dwarfs 0.1
distance from nearest black hole 0.2
absorption rate of planets and planetismals by parent star 0.1
star age 0.4
star metallicity 0.05
ratio of 40K, 235,238U, 232Th to iron in star-planetary system 0.02
star orbital eccentricity 0.1
star mass 0.001
star luminosity change relative to speciation types & rates 0.00001
star color 0.4
star rotation rate 0.3
rate of change in star rotation rate 0.3
star magnetic field 0.1
star magnetic field variability 0.1
stellar wind strength and variability 0.1
short period variation in parent star diameter 0.1
star’s carbon to oxygen ratio 0.01
star’s space velocity relative to Local Standard of Rest 0.05
star’s short term luminosity variability 0.05
star’s long term luminosity variability 0.05
amplitude and duration of star spot cycle 0.1
number & timing of solar system encounters with interstellar gas clouds and cloudlets 0.1
galactic tidal forces on planetary system 0.2
H3+ production 0.1
supernovae rates & locations 0.01
white dwarf binary types, rates, & locations 0.01
structure of comet cloud surrounding planetary system 0.3
planetary distance from star 0.001
inclination of planetary orbit 0.5
axis tilt of planet 0.3
rate of change of axial tilt 0.01
period and size of axis tilt variation 0.1
planetary rotation period 0.1
rate of change in planetary rotation period 0.05
planetary revolution period 0.2
planetary orbit eccentricity 0.3
rate of change of planetary orbital eccentricity 0.1
rate of change of planetary inclination 0.5
period and size of eccentricity variation 0.1
period and size of inclination variation 0.1
precession in planet’s rotation 0.3
rate of change in planet’s precession 0.3
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon abundance in solar nebula 0.1
number of moons 0.2
mass and distance of moon 0.01
surface gravity (escape velocity) 0.001
tidal force from sun and moon 0.1
magnetic field 0.01
rate of change & character of change in magnetic field 0.1
albedo (planet reflectivity) 0.1
density 0.1
density of interstellar and interplanetary dust particles in vicinity of life-support planet 0.3
reducing strength of planet’s primordial mantle 0.3
thickness of crust 0.01
timing of birth of continent formation 0.1
oceans-to-continents ratio 0.2
rate of change in oceans to continents ratio 0.1
global distribution of continents 0.3
frequency, timing, & extent of ice ages 0.1
frequency, timing, & extent of global snowball events 0.1
silicate dust annealing by nebular shocks 0.02
asteroidal & cometary collision rate 0.1
change in asteroidal & cometary collision rates 0.1
rate of change in asteroidal & cometary collision rates 0.1
mass of body colliding with primordial Earth  0.002
timing of body colliding with primordial Earth 0.05
location of body’s collision with primordial Earth 0.05
position & mass of Jupiter relative to Earth 0.01
major planet eccentricities 0.05
major planet orbital instabilities 0.05
drift and rate of drift in major planet distances 0.05
number & distribution of planets 0.001
distance of gas giant planets from mean motion resonances 0.02
orbital separation distances among inner planets 0.01
mass of Neptune 0.1
total mass of Kuiper Belt asteroids 0.1
mass distribution of Kuiper Belt asteroids 0.2
average rainfall precipitation 0.01
variation and timing of average rainfall precipitation 0.01
atmospheric transparency 0.01
atmospheric pressure 0.01
atmospheric viscosity 0.1
atmospheric electric discharge  rate 0.01
atmospheric temperature gradient 0.01
carbon dioxide level in atmosphere 0.01
rates of change in carbon dioxide levels in atmosphere throughout the planet’s history 0.001
rates of change in water vapor levels in atmosphere throughout the planet’s history 0.01
rate of change in methane level in early atmosphere 0.01
oxygen quantity in atmosphere 0.01
nitrogen quantity in atmosphere 0.01
carbon monoxide quantity in atmosphere 0.1
chlorine quantity in atmosphere 0.1
aerosol particle density emitted from forests 0.05
cobalt quantity in crust 0.1
arsenic quantity in crust 0.1
copper quantity in crust 0.1
boron quantity in crust 0.1
cadmium quantity in crust 0.1
calcium quantity in crust 0.4
fluorine quantity in crust 0.1
iodine quantity in crust 0.1
magnesium in crust 0.4
manganese quantity in crust 0.1
nickel quantity in crust 0.1
phosphorus quantity in crust 0.1
potassium quantity in crust 0.4
tin quantity in crust 0.1
zinc quantity in crust 0.1
molybdenum quantity in crust 0.05
vanadium quantity in crust 0.1
chromium quantity in crust 0.1
selenium quantity in crust 0.1
iron quantity in oceans 0.1
tropospheric ozone quantity 0.01
stratospheric ozone quantity 0.01
mesospheric ozone quantity 0.01
water vapor level in atmosphere 0.01
oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere 0.1
quantity of greenhouse gases in atmosphere 0.01
rate of change in greenhouse gases in atmosphere 0.01
poleward heat transport in atmosphere  by mid-latitude storms 0.2
quantity of forest & grass fires 0.01
quantity of sea salt aerosols in troposphere 0.1
soil mineralization 0.1
quantity of anaeorbic bacteria in the oceans 0.01
quantity of aerobic bacteria in the oceans 0.01
quantity of anaerobic nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the early oceans 0.01
quantity, variety, and timing of sulfate-reducing bacteria 0.00001
quantity of geobacteraceae 0.01
quantity of aerobic photoheterotrophic bacteria 0.01
quantity of decomposer bacteria in soil 0.01
quantity of mycorrhizal fungi in soil 0.01
quantity of nitrifying microbes in soil 0.01
quantity & timing of vascular plant introductions 0.001
quantity, timing, & placement of carbonate-producing animals 0.00001
quantity, timing, & placement of methanogens 0.00001
phosphorus and iron absorption by banded iron formations 0.01
quantity of soil sulfur 0.1
ratio of electrically conducting inner core radius to radius of the adjacent turbulent fluid shell 0.2
ratio of core to shell (see above) magnetic diffusivity 0.2
magnetic Reynold’s number of the shell (see above) 0.2
elasticity of iron in the inner core 0.2
electromagnetic Maxwell shear stresses in the inner core 0.2
core precession frequency for planet 0.1
rate of interior heat loss for planet 0.1
quantity of sulfur in the planet’s core 0.1
quantity of silicon in the planet’s core 0.1
quantity of water at subduction zones in the crust 0.01
quantity of high pressure ice in subducting crustal slabs 0.1
hydration rate of subducted minerals 0.1
water absorption capacity of planet’s lower mantle 0.1
tectonic activity 0.05
rate of decline in tectonic activity 0.1
volcanic activity 0.1
rate of decline in volcanic activity 0.1
location of volcanic eruptions  0.1
continental relief 0.1
viscosity at Earth core boundaries 0.01
viscosity of lithosphere 0.2
thickness of mid-mantle boundary 0.1
rate of sedimentary loading at crustal subduction zones 0.1
biomass to comet infall ratio 0.01
regularity of cometary infall 0.1
number, intensity, and location of hurricanes 0.02
intensity of primordial cosmic superwinds 0.05
number of smoking quasars 0.05
formation of large terrestrial planet in the presence of two or more gas giant planets 0.1
orbital stability of large terrestrial planet in the presence of two or more gas giant planets 0.01
total mass of Oort Cloud objects 0.2
mass distribution of Oort Cloud objects 0.2
air turbulence in troposphere 0.1
quantity of sulfate aerosols in troposphere 0.1
quantity of actinide bioreducing bacteria 0.01
quantity of phytoplankton 0.001
hydrothermal alteration of ancient oceanic basalts 0.01
quantity of iodocarbon-emitting marine organisms 0.01
location of dislocation creep relative to diffusion creep in and near the crust-mantle boundary (determines mantle convection dynamics) 0.1
size of oxygen sinks in the planet’s crust 0.2
size of oxygen sinks in the planet’s mantle 0.2
mantle plume production 0.1
number and mass of planets in system suffering significant drift 0.2
mass of the galaxy’s central black hole 0.3
timing of the growth of the galaxy’s central black hole 0.5
rate of in-spiraling gas into galaxy’s central black hole during life epoch 0.05
distance from nearest giant galaxy 0.5
distance from nearest Seyfert galaxy 0.9
amount of mass loss by star in its youth 0.1
rate of mass loss of star in its youth 0.3
rate of mass loss by star during its middle age 0.3
quantity of magnetars (proto-neutron stars with very strong magnetic fields) produced during galaxy’s history 0.05
variation in coverage of star’s surface by faculae 0.5
ratio of galaxy’s dark halo mass to its baryonic mass 0.2
ratio of galaxy’s dark halo mass to its dark halo core mass 0.2
galaxy cluster formation rate 0.1
proximity of supernovae and hypernovae throughout history of planet and planetary system 0.1
tidal heating from  neighboring galaxies 0.5
tidal heating from dark galactic and galaxy cluster halos 0.5
intensity and duration of galactic winds 0.3
density of dwarf galaxies in vicinity of home galaxy 0.1
amount of photoevaporation during planetary formation from parent star and other nearby stars 0.2
orbital inclinations of companion planets in system 0.1
variation of orbital inclinations of companion planets 0.2
inclinations and eccentricities of nearby terrestrial planets 0.3
in-spiral rate of stars into black holes within parent galaxy 0.7
strength of magnetocentrifugally launched wind of parent star during its protostar era 0.2
degree to which the atmospheric composition of the planet departs from thermodynamic equilibrium 0.01
delivery rate of volatiles to planet from asteroid-comet belts during epoch of planet formation 0.1
amount of outward migration of Neptune 0.1
amount of outward migration of Uranus 0.1
Q-value (rigidity) of planet during its early history 0.2
variation in Q-value of planet during its early history 0.3
injection efficiency of shock wave material from nearby supernovae into collapsing molecular cloud that forms star and planetary system 0.1
number of giant galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number of large galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number of dwarf galaxies in galaxy cluster 0.2
number and sizes of planets and planetesimals consumed by star 0.3
distance of galaxy’s corotation circle from  center of galaxy 0.1
rate of diffusion of heavy elements from galactic center out to the galaxy’s corotation circle 0.2
outward migration of star relative to galactic center 0.3
degree to which exotic matter self interacts 0.01
migration of planet during its formation in the protoplanetary disk 0.1
viscosity gradient in protoplanetary disk 0.1
variations in star’s diameter 0.1
average quantity of gas infused into the universe’s first star clusters 0.1
frequency of late impacts by large asteroids and comets 0.1
level of supersonic turbulence in the infant universe 0.05
number and sizes of intergalactic hydrogen gas clouds in galaxy’s vicinity 0.1
average longevity of intergalactic hydrogen gas clouds in galaxy’s vicinity 0.2
minimization of chloromethane production by rotting plants and fungi that are exposed to the atmosphere (life’s survival demands very efficient burial mechanisms and relatively low temperatures) , 01
avoidance of apsidal phase locking in the orbits of planets in the planetary system 0.03
number density of the first metal-free stars to form in the universe 0.02
epoch during which the first metal-free stars form in cosmic history 0.1
level of spot production on star’s surface 0.2
variability of spot production on star’s surface 0.2
size of the carbon sink in the deep mantle of the planet 0.05
average circumstellar medium density for white dwarf red giant pairs 0.2
number densities of metal-poor and extremely metal-poor galaxies 0.1
rate of growth of central spheroid for the galaxy 0.05
amount of gas infalling into the central core of the galaxy 0.1
level of cooling of gas infalling into the central core of the galaxy 0.1
ratio of dual water molecules, (H2O)2, to single water molecules, H 2O, in the troposphere 0.03
heavy element abundance in the intracluster medium for the early universe 0.1
quantity of volatiles on and in Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone 0.001
rate of infall of intergalactic gas into emerging and growing galaxies during first five billion years of cosmic history 0.1
pressure of the intra-galaxy-cluster medium 0.1
proximity of solar nebula to a type I supernova whose core underwent significant gravitational collapse before carbon deflagration 0.01
timing of solar nebula formation relative to a type I supernova whose core underwent significant gravitational collapse before carbon deflagrataion 0.01
sizes of largest cosmic structures in the universe 0.01
level of spiral substructure in spiral galaxy 0.2
mass of outer gas giant planet relative to inner gas giant planet 0.05
Kozai oscillation level in planetary system 0.7
triggering of El Nino events by explosive volcanic eruptions 0.1
time window between the peak of kerogen production and the appearance of intelligent life 0.1
time window between the production of cisterns in the planet’s crust that can effectively collect and store petroleum and natural gas and the appearance of intelligent life 0.1
reduction of Kuiper Belt mass during planetary system’s early history 0.1
efficiency of stellar mass loss during final stages of stellar burning 0.3
efficiency of flows of silicate melt, hypersaline hydrothermal fluids, and hydrothermal vapors in the upper crust 0.2
supernova eruption rate when galaxy is young 0.2
range of rotation rates for stars are on the verge of becoming supernovae 0.2
quantity of dust formed in the ejecta of Population III supernovae 0.1
chemical composition of dust ejected by Population III stars 0.3
time in cosmic history when the merging of galaxies peaks 0.2
efficiency of ocean pumps that return nutrients to ocean surfaces 0.1
sulfur and sulfate content of oceans 0.3
density of extragalactic intruder stars in solar neighborhood 0.4
density of dust-exporting stars in solar neighborhood 0.3
average rate of increase in galaxy sizes 0.1
change in average rate of increase in galaxy sizes throughout cosmic history 0.1
proximity of solar nebula to asymptotic giant branch stars 0.05
timing of solar nebula formation relative to its close approach to asymptotic giant branch stars 0.05
orientation of continents relative to prevailing winds 0.3
quantity and proximity of gamma-ray burst events relative to emerging solar nebula 0.01
proximity of superbubbles to planetary system during life epoch of life-support planet 0.03
proximity of strong ultraviolet emitting stars to planetary system during life epoch of life-support planet 0.02
number, mass, and distance from star of gas giant planets in addition to planets of the mass and distance of Jupiter and Saturn 0.01
quantity and proximity of galactic gamma-ray burst events relative to time window for intelligent life 0.1
infall of buckminsterfullerenes from interplanetary and interstellar space upon surface of planet 0.3
quantity of silicic acid in the oceans 0.1
heat flow through the planet’s mantle from radiometric decay in planet’s core 0.002
water absorption by planet’s mantle 0.01
timing of star formation peak for the universe 0.2
timing of star formation peak for the galaxy 0.2

Ibime:

Here is your probability.

It's a load of nonsense. i like also that you plagarised Hugh Ross' rubbish and have tried to pass it off as your own.

Thus, less than 1 chance in 10282(million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion) [/b]

Ross's calculations are false for the most part, deal with the probablity for a planet capable of of supporting life (that other planets and space bodies that can probaby supprt life have been found, doesn't detract him from his nonsense) not the formation of the Earh per se. Further, Ross doesn't take into account figures and scientific findings that would skew his flawed calculations. That's bad statitics.

SO - TO HOW MANY DECIMAL PLACES WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ROUND UP BEFORE YOU AGREE THAT IT IS ABSOLUTELY ZERO?

So,it's not zero? And given the billions and billions of stars in the universe, each possibly with its own set of orbiting planets, surely, all you need is one in trillion and trillions to give rise to intelliget lif who believe that the entire universe was made for them. That is not say that Ross' calculations are accurate, but to point out the fallacy in presuming that one in inumerable number of planets contained in a vast universe is equal to zero. No mathematician worth her salt would make such an equivocation.

Foolishness knows no bounds -

Nor dishonesty. You seem to have both in bounds.

anyway, below is how it is calculated if you care to waste your time. I don comot for this discussion because it is utterly pointless.

Or here if you want to see it from ross himself:

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design_evidences/200404_probabilities_for_life_on_earth.shtml

Don't expect Ross' variables to be any clearer on the website, though.

KAG:

It's a load of nonsense. i like also that you plagarised Hugh Ross' rubbish and have tried to pass it off as your own.

No I didn't. You think say i get time to calculate all this nonsense. If you see am sef, you go think say na Naija man calculate that thing?

KAG:

Ross's calculations are false for the most part, deal with the probablity for a planet capable of of supporting life (that other planets and space bodies that can probaby supprt life have been found, doesn't detract him from his nonsense) not the formation of the Earh per se. Further, Ross doesn't take into account figures and scientific findings that would skew his flawed calculations. That's bad statitics.

Who is Hugh ross? I just googled the thing jare. Obviously, you have had this debate many times for you to know his name. Why do you so incessantly pursue this topic. Is it your job? Do you get paid for it?

As for the part in bold, if your coconut head had any Mathematical sense, you will see that he has factored in the probability that there are 1022 life-supporting bodies in the Universe, not just earth. ITK.

KAG:

So,it's not zero? And given the billions and billions of stars in the universe, each possibly with its own set of orbiting planets, surely, all you need is one in trillion and trillions to give rise to intelligent life who believe that the entire universe was made for them. That is not say that Ross' calculations are accurate, but to point out the fallacy in presuming that one in inumerable number of planets contained in a vast universe is equal to zero.

Do you know the difference between dependent and independent probability? You have not even factored in the chonological order of events that need to happen for life on earth to be random. Even if earth is one out of a zillion planets, the time-dependent probabilities would kill your argument dead.


Anyway - let us finish this argument here. You are no Professor of evolution, neither am I. It is just like having two psychologists arguing about nuclear fission. Do not argue what you don't know.