|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 64/34 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 5052 days) Posts: 1 From: Austin, TX, US Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Problems with evolution? Submit your questions. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
So all I have heard is that Dembski and Gitt are wrong. Do any of you purpose any other way of differentiating between random key strokes and the written English language?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Why does it matter? Your original argument has already been shown to be hideously, embarrassingly, shockingly, terribly ignorant and wrong. You are now trying to move the goalposts again. No I was just pointing out an evolutionists insistance on homology as evidence for evolution was not warranted Even Gavin Debeer said:
Because homology implies community of descent from a common ancestor it might be thought that genetics would provide the key to the problem of homology. This is where the worst shock of all is encountered [because] characters controlled by identical genes are not necessarily homologous [and] homologous structures need not be controlled by identical genes. You have to believe that the fleetingly unlikely event of just the right mutations led to for example 5 digits on vertebrate for limbs but then the mechanism was lost and regained in an entirely different way several times. To quote Dembski: Events of fleetingly small possibility do not occur by chance. Edited by havoc, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
You haven't even told us how they differentiate the English language from random key strokes. How do we measure this "specified complexity"? Can you differentiate the difference between the english language and random key strokes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
How do we measure this "specified complexity"? I have given you two different ways purposed to measure information content or specified complexity. You guys don’t like them and have poked holes in these arguments. I have seen no one point to a better way to measuer it. Actually it is hard to get any of you to admit that there is any difference in random information (random keystrokes) and specified complexity (like the English language).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Dembski does make some really stupid statements doesn't he. What are the odds of lightning striking a particular leaf in a field? This would be explaind by Dembskis Law filter. The nature of lightning would cause it to strike somewhere. There is nothing intrinsic in DNA that causes it to code for one thing over the other. To take your analogy further you should look for lighting to repeatedly strike a corn field in a way that leaves a picture of Darwin scorched in the field. Then you would have a point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Knowing how to read English has always worked for me. So there is a difference but since it doesnt fit well with your theory you just leave it alone?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
The thing is, in DNA, there really is no such thing as random keystrokes Realy so mutation is no longer random? Answer carefully your entire world view hangs in the balance.
I could not, however, necessarily differentiate between the Cletic language and a bunch of random keystrokes (I think the Celtic language IS just a buynch of random keystrokes, but that's neither here nor there). Nor could I differentiate between Arabic script and some strange little swirls on a piece of paper. So we did not know that hieroglyphics were language before finding the Rosetta stone? You guys are punishing yourselves to avoid the obvious. Language is language and code is code only because of specified complexity and nothing intrinsic in DNA would lead to this occurrence. And every known code has a code maker. This is just a fact of life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Incidentally, what if I wrote a program that would randomly combine English words into sentences constrained by English grammar (which I could do in a matter of minutes). Would the sentences so produced have a designer? Would they have specified complexity? Could you tell whether they had specified complexity just by looking at them, or would you have to know whether they were produced by (a) my computer program (b) an intelligent albeit Surrealist poet? Yes you an intellegent person could creat program that results in specified complexity. However an earth quake at the scrabble store will never write a novel.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4776 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
But more obscure yet is the relevance of all this to the question of design detection in DNA. How is my ability to recognize English useful in recognizing whether a certain DNA sequence was produced by design or evolution? Code is code my friend. Can you name one code that has no code maker?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024