> The trouble with unpredictable systems such as the Earth's atmosphere is
> that arbitrarily tiny perturbations of the initial state yield huge
> divergences in the end result.

Same if I have a 4GB chaotic simulation running on my machine, just one 
bit different in the initial conditions will yield 4GB of completely 
different data.  Yet it will be totally repeatable.

> If I set my Earth up the same way as your Earth, but with a 10^-47 error
> in wind speed in one place, the weather patterns of my Earth will
> rapidly diverge from the weather patterns you got.

Sure, but what if you set up your Earth with the *exact* same initial 
conditions?  I know there is randomness inherent at the quantum level, 
but maybe that's just because we haven't figured out yet what is driving 
those events, so they just *appear* random to us.

> On top of all that, the Earth has been here for a few billion years.
> Where did the designer find the time (and space?) to rerun their
> simulation countless hundred trillion times to get it all to work out?

Who knows what is going on outside of our universe, or before our 
universe was started?

> In short, to make the implausible ID theory work, you need to postulate
> even more radical theories such as the designer running the universe as
> a computer simulation...

So if you got a computer simulation running here on Earth, that somehow 
simulated molecular interactions etc, and then you started it off with 
the DNA of an ant or something, you would have an ant "alive" in your 
computer.  If you made the computer big enough that you can simulate 
more complex lifeforms, and then intelligent lifeforms, how would they 
ever figure out what was going on outside of their "world"?  Obviously 
the "world" and complexity of the simulation would have to be orders of 
magnitude smaller than our universe, but that simply means some "parent" 
universe of ours would just need to be bigger and more complex.

Post a reply to this message