Richardthughes
Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
Bwahaha
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments
| Quote | 1
Reg
10/06/2009
6:44 pm
“[as well as] Kolmogorov there are lots and lots of other definitions of information out there. There’s Fisher information. There’s Shannon information. There’s Jack Szostak’s functional information.”
So it would help greatly if ID scholars would indicate exactly what information they mean when they say, for example, that duplicating a gene does not increase the available genetic information. Dr Dembski – the Isaac Newton of Information Theory – hasn’t told us what sort of information Dr Wells was referring to, but this post would be an excellent opportunity to do so.
[Reg:] You’re on thin ice so stop with the flip comments. As it is, I defined what concept of information I was using when discussing duplication in my book INTELLIGENT DESIGN. As for Wells, should he have explicitly laid out what concept of information he was using? I don’t think it was necessary. The concept he was using has wide currency, both within and outside the ID movement. Shallit’s fault is that he was so intent on making Wells look ridiculous that he refused to employ the principle of charity in interpreting his remarks and then used a concept of information that Wells could not have been using except in error. On another note, my harsh moderation policies have been considerably reined in at UD given the new management, but I have no problem banning you from this thread and I still have enough clout here to get you banned period. So keep it civil or head for the exit. –WmAD |
--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine
|
