|Tony M Nyphot
Joined: June 2008
|Quote (olegt @ Oct. 21 2012,19:09)|
BTW TSZ- part of defintion of “artifact” is that there is no good natural explanation. And yes part of coming to a design inference means that there is no good natural explanation.
Let's open Merriam–Webster:
1 a something created by humans usually for a practical purpose;
1 b something characteristic of or resulting from a particular human institution, period, trend, or individual.
2 a product of artificial character (as in a scientific test) due usually to extraneous (as human) agency
The standard definition of an artifact is not something that cannot be explained through a natural mechanism. Instead, it is something that is positively tied to human agency.
If Joe had bothered to google the word "artifact", he would find the etymological meaning is "made by skill" and the origin of the word was specific to objects created via human skill.
Though not falling to the same level of stupidity of "ice is not water," still a major fail by the ever moronic existence that is JoeG, a bigger, dumber ass that any Kardashian appendage.
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK
"You could always wrap fresh fish in the paper you publish it on, though, and sell that." - Field Man on how to find value in Gary Gaulin's real-science "theory"