So, calculating that monkeys could not type a line from Shakespeare rules out the possibility that evolution has taken place?
Sorry SH but all that little exercise in futility shows is that the author has some really bad assumptions about abiogenesis, evolution and the calculation of their probability. If he seriously believes that he has calculated the probability of abiogenesis, or more importantly the probability of a genetic change spreading through a population, he is deluded.
For any argument by analogy to work the analogs have to be demonstrably identical in the essential properties.
In what way is a single monkey typing away anything like the processes involved in abiogenesis and evolution? (Remember, evolution is concerned with populations and changes to existing genomes)
Your claim that this bit of misguided probability rules out the ToE is jumping to a rather large and unwarranted conclusion. All it does prove is that monkeys would have a difficult time typing "TO BE OR NOT TO BE, THAT IS THE QUESTION.".
He simply uses the monkey analogy to make his *math* readable for laymen.
His probability math itself is quite sound (which is why Darwinists can't post math of their own to refute it). Said math is also quite germane to whether or not genetic DNA programming can sequence itself (or not) without aid (read: external bias).