RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
2ndclass



Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2007,12:50   

Quote (heddle @ Mar. 06 2007,19:25)
What I did was a huge amount of research, (re)reading Dembski's books (no fun, I'll assure you) and searching for all existing criticisms. The bottom line, I'll readily admit, is I am not sure I can add anything new.

I think it's true that Dembski's core problems have all been pointed out, some of them ad nauseam.  But one could easily fill a book with the errors that are offshoots of the core problems.  And rereading inevitably reveals undiscovered errors.

For example, I recently saw that in the last two paragraphs of page 8 on this paper, Dembski tries to invalidate Bayesian reasoning, but ends up proving by contradiction that Fisherian reasoning is invalid.  Such is the miscellany of illogic that's sprinkled liberally throughout Dembski's work.

--------------
"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

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]