Advocatus Diaboli
Posts: 198
Joined: Nov. 2007
|
If you could not follow what Dembski and Marks were trying to argue, Casey Luskin explains everything:
| Quote |
After assessing various examples of evolutionary searches, Dembski and Marks show that attempts to model Darwinian evolution via computer simulations, such Richard Dawkins' famous "METHINKSITISLIKEAWEASEL" example, start off with, as Dembski and Marks put it, "problem-specific information about the search target or the search-space structure." According to the paper, such simulations only reach their evolutionary targets because there is pre-specified "accurate information to guide them," or what they call "active information." The implication, of course, is that some intelligent programmer is required to front-load a search with active information if the search is to successfully find rare functional genetic sequences. They conclude, "Active information is clearly required in even modestly sized searches." |
That makes more sense than the original paper. Dembski and Marks should get Luskin to join in on their next paper.
There's also a bit of lamentation over Baylor.
--------------
I once thought that I made a mistake, but I was wrong.
"I freely admit I’m a sociopath" - DaveScot
"Most importanly, the facts are on the side of ID." - scordova
"UD is the greatest website of all time." stevestory
|
