Talk:Gambler's Fallacy

From EvoWiki

Someone wrote in "Examples in creationist arguments":

There are no examples to be given, as the person whose credulity allows them to believe that flipping the coin of mutation over and over again will surmount the odds of climbing Mount Improbable is actually the one who is committing the Gambler's Fallacy. The coin has no more memory than does DNA, and DNA will only carry a mutation on to the next generation if it results in enough offspring to overcome the numbers of those who do not carry the mutation such that it may propagate. If it does not, then it will not be passed on. This argues strongly against the idea that mutation + natural selection may act as engineers of biological change.

This is nonsense. Of course DNA has a "memory" - it contains information. You do not understand natural selection. Please read it up. --tk (t) 15:44, 12 April 2006 (BST)