Joined: Feb. 2008
|Quote (bjray @ April 15 2010,22:57)|
Well, unfortunately, I can offer you no good advice on how to calculate such readings of an object using his CSI theory (if you will). Thing is, I have not in my spare time (the little there is), nor as a part of class, actually read his work on CSI.
If it turned out that there was no objectively defensible "CSI theory", would that affect your opinion of Dembski and the ID movement ?
Well, I think that ID'ers, evolutionists, old earth, young earth, all have some interesting points worth taking into consideration.
Taking into consideration for what ?
If you mean as a way of furthering our understanding of the real world, the creationist theories (including ID) would have to offer testable predictions.
For example (and back to Behe and his irreducible complexity), we know (today) that the cell has plenty of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Such that without one of the pieces, it would fail to operate as it was designed.
Evolution has no trouble producing such structures. If you'd taken the suggestion of reading the Dover transcript, you'd know how.