Given the evolutionary narrative, the traits in a population that are advantageous in a certain environment get passed down to future generations because those traits helped the organisms to survive. That's a nice story, but it begs the question: from where did the functional traits come from? Saying that an individual who owns a gun will be selected(will survive) in an enviornment where the gun is necessary for survival, does not explain the origin of the gun. If we appeal to random mutations for an "answer" to the origin of traits this is like appealing to random re-arrangement of particles that comprise a gun for an "answer" to the origin of gun.

 

Given the poly-3D enumeration mathematics, only a thousand particles can be arrangement into approximately 8.37x10^3271 different spatial arrangements. On the other hand there are 10^80 of atoms in the observable universe. Thus, appealing to random re-arrangement of particles as an explanation for the origin of a particular thing is absurd.

 

The same is true in the context of biology where only a 1000 nucleotides can be arranged into 10^602 different arrangements, which exceeds the number of atoms in the observable universe by more then 500 orders of magnitude.

 

The standard evolutionary narrative completely ignores the mathematical aspect of the origin of traits, but it just explains their selection once they are present in the gene pool of a population(the Hardy–Weinberg principle for e.g.).

 

What is the reason for this ignorance?

!

Moderator Note

The ignorance is yours; we've been through this kind of discussion before, you haven't learned anything from that, and you were told not to bring it up again.