N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Gary complains that his critics over there haven't read every word of his tripe. However, this makes no difference at all, (a) because he equally ignores complaints from those who have read it all, and (b) so many errors are obvious on a simple reading of small excerpts that it is impossible that larger excerpts could yield anything beyond even more errors.
----------
Gary, if something emerges at a higher level from a lower level, then the two levels are de facto not the same, and are therefore not self-similar, and what emerged cannot be described as having been designed, so how do you justify using the terms self-similar and designed?
You claim that intelligence is pervasive through all of the biological realm, so what are the units of intelligence, and how many of them occur in a mushroom, in a liver cell, in an oak tree, and in the white-eye gene in fruit flies?
There are no standard meanings of intelligence that allow the use to which you try to put the term.
What does resorption of brains in tunicates have to do with loss of the genome?
-------
Lastly, Richard Forrest is an accomplished vertebrate paleontologist, known for work on marine reptiles, and he's also an IT consultant, so he's competent to assess Gary's rubbish from both the computational and the scientific sides. Gary Hurd has been an expert on creationist and IDist claims for a very long time. He's published an impressive quantity and diversity of publications in mathematics, biology, chemistry, and more. We all know the potential failings of arguments from authority, but nonetheless these are people who can conclude with great authority that Gaulin's stuff is unscientific crap.
Gary spouts incoherent rubbish, gets thoroughly trashed by everyone and is unable to say anything competent in his own defense. Indeed, great enjoyment is to be had, albeit at Gary's expense.
|
