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 >  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 08 2007,15:40   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ June 08 2007,13:19)
Quote

Could it be that mere algorithmic compressibility is, in fact, a reliable hallmark of design?

SAI says... short program length means that there is a simple computational process that accounts for something. That can't be blown up into the rarefied design Dembski wants to underwrite.

These folks don't get out much, do they?

Nope. And I second everything Louis has said. I wish they'd get out and discover something worth knowing.

(And I'm still reeling from that creationist Galapagos trip link - thanks. Half the chocolate in the office is now gone. Gaaa.) :p
 
Quote
Yet, the “Chu-Carroll” “Behe” counter on Google is now up to 26,400 hits. The Chu-Carroll placebo is in high demand.
 
Quote
I tell ya, if PZ Meyers and his shrill venoumous ilk didn’t exist we’d have to invent them.

Are these guys bragging, or complaining? I can't tell anymore. (And you did invent me, DaveScot, or at least 90% of what you think is me.)

("First they came for the cupcakes, I didn't speak up for I had a stash of hash brownies...") :)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
  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]