Re: [asa] Atheist finds God thru Behe's books....

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Wed Oct 14 2009 - 00:38:07 EDT

On Oct 13, 2009, at 10:23 PM, Schwarzwald wrote:

> How does Behe take away support for his claims from the paper? I
> provided the link for you - Behe can speak for himself on this. I
> just provided some quotes and some additional commentary. And you,
> of course, can respond to what Behe says as well. I also asked where
> Behe claims that these things are impossible - he may have done so
> and I simply missed it, so I'd like to see this quote.

Behe makes a Stats 101 boo boo. He takes the probability of a single
mutation and squares it for a double mutation. This is an implicit
assumption of statistical independence.
  The very title of the Lenski paper reveals that this is NOT true. He
claims that the mutation is contingent, the probability of the second
event is dependent on the first one thus breaking the assumption of
statistical independence. Thus, Lenski refutes Behe. My impossible
claim is the odds that Behe wrongly computes in EoE are vanishingly
small and to use the vernacular the event are impossible. It's like
saying quantum tunneling my fist through the wall is impossible. The
odds are non-zero but so close to zero to be effectively impossible.

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Oct 14 00:38:37 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 14 2009 - 00:38:37 EDT