Jump to content

is 20 billion years enough?


JC1

Recommended Posts

If we take 1 million monkeys and gave each of them a typewriter and they each type one word per minute, the chance of all of them combined typing one of Shakespeare's sonnet that consist of 300 words would take them 10 X 10^50 years <-that's 10 with 50 zeros behind it...

 

"In a study published today in the journal Science, a team of researchers says the universe is between 11.2 billion and 20 billion years old."

 

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/age_universe_030103.html

 

..now the human DNA consist of 3 billion letters...how long do you think it took for it all to come about to form human life just by chance? Is 20 billion years really enough?

 

http://www.genome.gov/11006929

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we take 1 million monkeys and gave each of them a typewriter and they each type one word per minute' date=' the chance of all of them combined typing one of Shakespeare's sonnet that consist of 300 words would take them 10 X 10^50 years <-that's 10 with 50 zeros behind it...

 

"In a study published today in the journal Science, a team of researchers says the universe is between 11.2 billion and 20 billion years old."

 

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/age_universe_030103.html

 

..now the human DNA consist of 3 billion letters...how long do you think it took for it all to come about to form human life just by chance? Is 20 billion years really enough?

 

http://www.genome.gov/11006929

The monkey analogy isn't quite valid. The monkeys are expected to come up with something very specific: a Shakespearean sonnet. You then apply the argument to evolution to say that evolution is to produce something very specific: a human. Justification?

 

There is no reason to believe that evolution has an "end goal" of producing a human. All that is required for evolution to work is that it produce something which can successfully replicate. It need not be human. A more appropriate monkey analogy would be that the monkeys' writings are selected for anything which is readable, and not necessarily for Shakespeare. Suddenly the odds* are more favorable.

 

*You should also be careful not to read too heavily into using "chance," "odds," or "probability" in modeling something as being indicative of the way it behaves. Geneticists use probability to simplify predictions about how DNA will come together, but that doesn't mean DNA behaves "probabilistically." It's a chemical, and like any other, there are rules it obeys, not the least of which is that thermodynamics determines when and where it reacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

If you flipped a coin once every minute, how long would it take, on average, to get 100 heads in a row? (some huge number)

 

Now how long would it take, on average, to get one hundred heads in a row if you were allowed to ignore all "tails" results and continue counting heads? (199.5 minutes I think)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is 20 billion years really enough?
Of all the anti-evolution arguments, this one has got to be the worst. Since evolution tells the YECs that 6000 years isn't enough they attempt to make waves at the other end using flawed logic and bad data. Just more of the ID "create-controversy-and-then-point-to-it" tactics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.