When I was growing up my father (who is the most brilliant scientist I have ever known — he worked on the Manhattan A-bomb project, was the founder and director of an experimental nuclear reactor at Washington State University, and developed the Ph.D. program in chemical physics at WSU) delighted in giving me puzzles to figure out.

One in particular I remember: He asked if I would rather be given a million dollars, or be given a penny one day, two pennies the next day, four pennies the next day, and doubled pennies for a month.

Of course, I knew it was a trick question, so I did the math. The doubled pennies would be worth 10 million dollars in a 30-day month, and more than 20 million dollars in a 31-day month.

Later in life (after I was awakened from my Darwinian stupor) I took my dad’s mathematical admonitions to heart. Even given the most generous assumptions about populations, mutation rates, reproductive events, etc. (i.e., probabilistic resources) the notion that Darwinian mechanisms can account for what is credited to them is perhaps the most transparently mathematically absurd proposition ever advanced in the name of science.

This is not hard to figure out. In fact, it’s a completely trivial exercise.