Occam's Aftershave
Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
| Quote (blipey @ Feb. 12 2008,21:11) | Leading ID Theorist, JoeG, speaks again on the usefulness of ID.
Seriously!
| Quote | In order to tell if blipey's string- 100011101001011100010111010101- is designed or not I would need to know where he got it from.
For example, did it just pop into his bitty little head, was it found on the wall of a cave, was it on a piece of paper or what? |
In order to tell if my string is designed, Joe would need me to tell him whether or not I designed it. This ID thing really has something going for it!
So, Joe, um...if I told you I found it on a piece of paper, could you then tell me if it was designed? What new information (relevant information) would that fact give you? |
It especially funny given that Joe is now touting Dumbshitski's claim of the affirmative to his question:
Can objects, even if nothing is known about how they arose, exhibit features that reliably signal the action of an intelligent cause?
I'm having a ball watching Thornton make Joe dance around like a trained gerbil BTW. 
--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."
- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.
|
