Joined: June 2006
|In a nutshell they are setting out to demonstrate how DNA-based life could have originated from undirected interplay of chemicals.|
If ID is true then it predicts the Harvard project will fail. This is based on the ID hypothesis that the complex patterns found in the basic machinery of life are too complex to come about without intelligent guidance.
Now if I may be so bold as to ask that ID theorists be allowed to make predictions based upon their own theory, and detractors are gracious enough to let us make our own predictions, then I donít want to hear any more nonsense about ID making no predictions. This is a prediction. It will play out soon enough. Let the chips fall where they may.
Okay, I can play that game too.
In July 2004, Dembski announced his seven part series, Mathematical Foundations of Intelligent Design, and he said, "I expect to place some of these articles in the mainstream statistics/probability/complexity literature."
My hypothesis is that Dembski's CSI/SC/LCI work is pure fluff. If my hypothesis is correct, then Dembski's attempts to publish that work in mainstream journals will fail.
It looks like he's trying to make good on his announcement. In his expert rebuttal for Dover, Dembski said that one of his seven papers was intended for an IEEE biocomputing journal. How's that working out for you, Dr. Dembski?
If Dave wants to put money against my prediction, I'm game.
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot