by **leegao** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:31 am

I believe the basic premise of irreducible complexity is flawed. Take the following analogy:

You have a lottery ticket in 10 to the 10th power with a 10 digit identification code that's worth 2 million dollars. Your chances of getting this ticket is 1 in 10 to the 10th power (10 trillion?).

Of course, if you do get the winning ticket, all 10 digit will match. However there are also tickets out there that have 9, 8, 7, etc matching numbers. But they are not the One ticket.

Similarly, the earth is that one planet that has everything for life: inhabitable environment, development of early semi-metabolic carbon-based compounds, and the like, similar to the 10 digits required for the winning lotto, even while there are extraterrestrial landmasses that satisfy only a few of these requirements.

Thus, if we accept the views of irreducible complexity theory, we are then stating that due to the complexity of the lotto code, that the satisfaction of all 10 digits are too miniscule for anyone to get that ticket. Of course, common sense tells us that this can not be true because there will definitely be that one winning ticket.

Of course many people will contend that the chances for the satisfaction of life is much more miniscule than those of the lottery ticket, but that's when we have to take things into perspective. Remember, whereas the analogy is limited by the population on earth, the universe is infinitely huge, therefore, no matter what the chances of life are, the universe is vast enough to outweigh it.