Quote from: twthmoses on August 23, 2018, 11:25:17 AM

Quote from: BADecker on August 22, 2018, 02:44:14 PM

Why would you think that I think C&E eliminates randomness? We have billions or trillions of examples of C&E, but none whatsoever of pure random. They don't necessarily eliminate each other. It all revolves around what exists. How can you eliminate something that you can't find, i.e., random? It isn't there to eliminate?

If "you have to have the exact same causes, under the exact same circumstances," all you have is the exact same physics working with the exact same C&E. Nothing goes on in evolution, because evolution only exists in the minds of people who think it exists. We have no example of evolution in nature. All examples of evolution in nature are examples of adaptation or like-begets-like. How do we know? Because adaptation or like-begets-like fits the examples better than the evolution fiction. How do we know this? Because evolution says "randomness" in part, but C&E in as many things that we understand C&E in, without finding even one proven instance of pure random, shows that random doesn't exist probability-wise.

No random means no evolution, because evolution theory says that there have to be random mutations. All mutations are C&E actions.

What this all means is that C&E continues to work with physics laws to make large of varieties of "things" by the programming that C&E is. Or can you show us one proof of something that came about by random without being the effect of one or more causes?

Further, all the scientists know that C&E works in everything. How do we know that they know this? Because that's all they do in their observation or experimentation. Even a scientist who looks for pure random does it by using all kinds of C&E to find it. In fact, the scientist, himself/herself, is totally made of C&E.

Cool

The question whether what we call random, is truly random, is a philosophical question. My guess is as good as yours. It does not really matter, because you dont need true random in Evolution. There are a billion factors on the line, just passing two DNA strings on to the next generation. Multiply that by billion years and a billion species, reproducing a trillion times each. You got all the randomness you will ever need. Not even all the computer power in the world could produce this level of randomness.

True randomness is by no means a requirement for evolution; you just need mixing under different circumstances, and there you got all the randomness you will need. And as said before Evolution is observable on the daily basic, in all species. Examples of evolution, you are constant looking for, are so plentiful in nature, you could not even count them. Certainly two parents having two different children is not adaptation? like-begets-like, Ill give you that, exists very much. I got another word for that, Evolution!

His argument is that if randomness doesn't exist, someone or something must have put everything in motion however he fails to realize that for example, if the big bang is the beginning of the universe, the big bang isn't sentient, it didn't put things in motion knowingly. He is basically assuming, nothing is random and also assuming the creator of the universe is god, it's a classic badecker argument where he just assumes incredible things without any proof.