Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Nov. 19 2012,17:35)|
|OK. If I am ignorant on the subject, it's because every creationist I've ever talked to has been utterly unable to explain or teach the concept.|
Since any organism is over 500 bits... let's try this.
Is this CSI? Yes/No Why?[/quote]
Ok, I wasn't being rude and you are not taking it that way...Good.
But are the numbers you posted CSI? No. Unless I'm missing something.....How are they even specified information at all?
Of course, I don't know what they represent but they just seem like a random listing of numbers to me at this point.
Have you read any of my or Dembski's writings using an archer to define specificity and calculating it?
It would seem germain to the subject should you want to learn that.
Interesting. Because if you had the correct algorithm you would find these number to be very, very specific.
In other words, you can't use CSI to tell the difference between a random series of numbers and a series of non-random numbers.
So, what's the point in CSI? It doesn't mean anything. It doesn't tell us anything unique or useful about the real world.
You do realize that any amino acid chain longer than 250 AAs is, by your definition "CSI" and therefore requiring intelligence. Do you realize that AA chains of nearly that length have been developed in the lab using the random attachments that you deplore as not being capable of forming CSI.
While we're at it, can you explain the 500 bit limit?
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.