A coincidence that bothers me

T50_Omaha8 · #1 11-12-2007, 01:40 AM

This thread is a pretty good microcosm of Christian apologetic science.

Hypothesize > Count on someone else to debunk > Qualify hypothesis > Repeat

JammyDodga · #2 11-12-2007, 06:39 AM

Dog backwards is god...

Coincidence? I think not!

Woof...

Stu Pidasso · #3 11-12-2007, 05:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This thread is a pretty good microcosm of Christian apologetic science.

Hypothesize > Count on someone else to debunk > Qualify hypothesis > Repeat

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually its not because a hypothesis has never been stated in this thread. The closest that has come is a sentinment that when an astronomical longshot comes in, its more likely something else played a role in the outcome than just random chance.

For instance, if one purchased a quick pick lotto ticket and the numbers came up 1 2 3 4 5 6. There is a good chance that person would be skeptical that the machine randomly produced those numbers. If that same person then purchased another quick pick ticket from the same machine and got the same numbers, 1 2 3 4 5 6, its not unreasonable for that person to think the machine is broke. I speculate that its more likely the machine is broke than it just happened to randomly produce the same set of numbers on two consecutive tickets. Nevertheless the machine can be working perfectly fine, even if it produces the same set of numbers on 10 consecutive quick pick lotto tickets.

Is it wrong to say that a "stellar" coincidence, like a total solar eclipse, makes it more likely an active designer exist? So far no one has addressed that question. This thread is about that question and not about proving the existence of a Christian God. People stop being so fearful.

Stu

TheCutter · #4 11-12-2007, 06:15 PM

It's the same kind of coincidence that the sun is exactly the size it is now, and not a bit smaller or bigger. DUCY?

It just seems as a coincidence because you wouldn't notice it if it wasn't true.

Justin A · #5 11-12-2007, 06:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Actually its not because a hypothesis has never been stated in this thread. The closest that has come is a sentinment that when an astronomical longshot comes in, its more likely something else played a role in the outcome than just random chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Astronomical long shots are expected to come in. There are so many different measurements and observations we can make in the universe that it would be strange if some of them were not weird coincidences.

[ QUOTE ]
For instance, if one purchased a quick pick lotto ticket and the numbers came up 1 2 3 4 5 6. There is a good chance that person would be skeptical that the machine randomly produced those numbers. If that same person then purchased another quick pick ticket from the same machine and got the same numbers, 1 2 3 4 5 6, its not unreasonable for that person to think the machine is broke. I speculate that its more likely the machine is broke than it just happened to randomly produce the same set of numbers on two consecutive tickets. Nevertheless the machine can be working perfectly fine, even if it produces the same set of numbers on 10 consecutive quick pick lotto tickets.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not even close with this analogy. Finding two lotto consecutive lotto tickets that are the same is hugely different than finding a ratio in our solar system that has a 3% difference.

[ QUOTE ]
Is it wrong to say that a "stellar" coincidence, like a total solar eclipse, makes it more likely an active designer exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it is completely wrong. You don't seem to grasp concepts of probability very well. When the same number comes up on a roulette wheel four times in a row, it doesn't make a designer any more likely. When a pitcher throws a perfect game in baseball, it doesn't make a designer any more likely.

Stu Pidasso · #6 11-12-2007, 08:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it is completely wrong. You don't seem to grasp concepts of probability very well. When the same number comes up on a roulette wheel four times in a row, it doesn't make a designer any more likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

What you say about the roulette wheel is only correct if you know the wheel to be true. If the same number comes up four times in a row would you fault the pit boss for closing the table and checking the wheel for trueness?

The difference in your thinking and mine is that I am open to the ideal of a designer while you are certain one does not exist. Your closed-minded-certainty is clouding your thinking about this.

Stu

madnak · #7 11-12-2007, 08:32 PM

You're missing the point. With 10 roulette wheels spinning 24/7 2 times per minute on average you get 1.7 million spins per day. There's a 1 in 54,000 chance that any three spins will be the same as the previous spin. Therefore, 4 in a row is a routine occurence. It happens every day. The pit boss won't even notice it, much less think his wheel's broken. Of course, a wheel could be broken, but 4-in-a-row is no indication of this. A normal wheel will get 4-in-a-row frequently. It is simply not that rare or remarkable.

And it's still orders of magnitude rarer than your moon example!

Stu Pidasso · #8 11-12-2007, 10:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You're missing the point. With 10 roulette wheels spinning 24/7 2 times per minute on average you get 1.7 million spins per day. There's a 1 in 54,000 chance that any three spins will be the same as the previous spin. Therefore, 4 in a row is a routine occurence. It happens every day. The pit boss won't even notice it, much less think his wheel's broken. Of course, a wheel could be broken, but 4-in-a-row is no indication of this. A normal wheel will get 4-in-a-row frequently. It is simply not that rare or remarkable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Madnak, your math is wrong. At 2 spins per minute, 10 roulette wheels would only do 28800 spins a day not 1.7 million as you stipulate.

Stu

madnak · #9 11-12-2007, 10:45 PM

Ah, right, I was using seconds instead of minutes.

Regardless, it'll happen every week or so. It's nothing to write home about.

Stu Pidasso · #10 11-12-2007, 10:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
No. Astronomical long shots are expected to come in. There are so many different measurements and observations we can make in the universe that it would be strange if some of them were not weird coincidences.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the universe is so large and there is so much to observe and measure and that we should expect to see longshots come in. However in this case we have seen a parlay of longshots come in. First is the longshot of life originating on this planet. The second longshot is life on this planet developing intelligence. The third longshot is the improbable coincidence of the same relative sizes of the disc of the moon and the disc of the sun from the perspective of the intelligent life on this planet.

After enough longshots parlay, I don't think its unreasonable to start doubting its just the result of chance. Do you?

Stu