>>13358344Retard.
JANNIES, THIS ISN'T /sci/, MOVE THE THREAD TO /his/ or /lit/ just so more people can call OP retarded.
>How does this disprove god? Simple, the number we get from that calculation has to be multiplied with the chance for an omnipotent being born from space dust to exist, basically adding a looooot more zeros to it, making it impossible to exist at the same time we do. So ultimately, our existence is already so unlikely, you would be insane to believe that a god exists at the same time we do.Stopped reading here.
The chance of a apple and a orange falling from their trees today could be calculated by chance of a happening times chance of b happening.
However the retarded reasoning in this text is like trying trying to calculate the chance of an apple falling from a tree and the chance of a tree having an apple fall from it by the chance of a times chance of b. Said formula works only for independent events, which isn't the case of the relationship between creator and creation, tree and apple.
If God exists and designed the universe, the universe (and therefore the present) must exist independently of how low the chance might appear at glance. In the same way if a tree had an apple fall from it an apple fell from a tree, if God exists and created the universe the universe exists and was designed by God. These aren't independent events and cannot, even hypothetically, be calculated by the simple formula you learn in highschool.
Also
>coming from space dustThe basic lack of understanding of theology and philosophy makes me think this was written by a 15 years old who consumed too much pop-sci.
Also /2
Notice how this retard put mathematical principles before the existence of God, there's literally no reason to believe you could apply maths to Him.
