Welcome to the fray, Kevin123,
The test would be easily conducted. You use two separate rooms and each of these rooms would contain different materials. In the first room random forces would be applied to the materials, in the second room an intelligent agent (human) would be introduced. Which one produces an item that is IC? Conduct that experiment billions of times and the results would be the same. Therefore based on scientific methods which is the better theory based on experimentation and observation?
If you are attempting to test ID against evolution, then (a) this is not a falsification test for ID, as both could work at different speeds and who finished first is irrelevant, and (b) it is not a representation of evolution but of random events, so the failure of this portion signifies nothing (while eventual success would be noteworthy). Likewise the testing of human intelligent design against human intelligent design proves nothing, because we already have an exceedingly high opinion of our intelligence, and think that anything we do approaches god-hood.
You are also not considering other possibilities that are possible. Let me rephrase your proposal to show some of your logical errors:
There are three rooms, in one you have a computer in a room operated by random code generation processes capable of being guided by an outside undetectable (ie supernatural) intelligence, in the second room you have a human programmer before a computer, and in the third you have a computer that operates by a simple algorithm: try 10 variations, take the best solution, make 10 variations on it and test again.
The first one models intelligent supernatural design, the second models intelligent human design, and the third one models mutation and selection.
The task is to design something that a human cannot design. Which one/s do you think will succeed? Do you consider the failure of the first room as falsification of ID?
Note that this third example is a common occurrence these days
Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia
quote:
Evolutionary computation uses iterative progress, such as growth or development in a population. This population is then selected in a guided random search using parallel processing to achieve the desired end. Such processes are often inspired by biological mechanisms of evolution.
Note that this is serious science, and there is at least one journal dedicated to it:
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/evco?cookieSet=1
quote:
Evolutionary Computation provides an international forum for facilitating and enhancing the exchange of information among researchers involved in both the theoretical and practical aspects of computational systems of an evolutionary nature.
The journal publishes both theoretical and practical developments of computational systems drawing their inspiration from nature, with particular emphasis on evolutionary algorithms (EAs), including, but not limited to, genetic algorithms (GAs), evolution strategies (ESs), evolutionary programming (EP), genetic programming (GP), classifier systems (CSs), and other natural computation techniques.
Enjoy.
posting tips writes:
type
[qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type
[quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
also check out
(help) links on any formating questions when in the reply window.
For other formating tips see
Posting Tips
Edited by RAZD, : added "likewise" sentence
Edited by RAZD, : clarity inside the first room
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •