Occam's Aftershave
Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
One again, AFDave can't type two sentences without lying
| Quote | | You are not reading carefully. I have no interest in quantitative complexity tests that Improvius is talking about. I am only interested in shining a spotlight on the fact that no quantitative test is required to determine that a butterfly is "higher tech" than a watch. Just as it is intuitively obvious to Improvius that an ancient artifact was designed--no quantitative test required. |
Improvius did not say design was determined because it was intuitively obvious Dave. He said exactly the opposite. Objects are tested for their qualitative attributes and compared agains a known threshold of what indicates human design.
Dave, you are the one who says we can detect design solely by quantitative means, intuitively estimating the amount of complexity.
As always, you resort to lying and equivocating when your asinine arguments get in trouble.
Liar Dave Hawkins true to form.
--------------
"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.
|
