Cubist
Posts: 559 Joined: Oct. 2007
|
Quote (Otangelo @ Feb. 10 2016,04:40) | Quote (Cubist @ Feb. 09 2016,23:43) | Curious: In spite of the boldfacing, italics, and oversized letters, Otangelo apparently managed to miss the most-recent iteration of the two questions I'd like him to answer. Well… perhaps making them an attention-getting color will help…
Do you have evidence of "information-rich systems" being produced by "intelligent agents" other than human beings?
What does "new information" look like?
As ever, I look forward to reading Otangelo's answers to my questions. |
Confirmation of intelligent design predictions
http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1659-c....ictions
In order to make design prediction, it must be established what can be recognized as design in nature : |
You may be right. I await your answers to the two questions I've been asking. Quote | Something having the PROPERTIES that we might attribute to that of a designed system: 1) IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 2) Acts as an informational processing systems, - |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 3) a system which uses some form of digital code, translated into instructions by another universal language translation (universal genetic code). This is LANGUAGE, MEANING. |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 4) Appearance of highly complex dependencies thus giving the appearence of Implicit intelligence (although not intelligent itself, indicates an origin involving intelligence.. ) |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 5) use of molecular machinery on a scale and complexity which mankind has never IMAGINED possible - all with appearence of exact purpose, intent, function and dependencies |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 6) exhibiting logical functional layers - regulatory genes controlling gene expression - conceptually teh same as a logical software layer controlling teh underlying system. |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 7) another layer of complex 3 Dimensional control and access, and adaptation to environment: Epiogentics. |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 8 Implicit built in ERROR checking from the get go: reducing mutations to a minimal |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 9) Display the DESIGN of complex software, designed to adapt and EVOLVE in a very controlled and careful way - while at the same time minimizing mutations. A system designed to EVOLVE and SURVIVE. (gene splicing ) .. |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | 10) Something which as well as exhibiting all of the above, also has no conceptual way of coming into existence through naturalistic means, : or something whose existence and origins appears to defy all known scientific understanding. Something which requires the application of alot of FAITH and IMAGINATION of some theories to describe its origins through natural means alone. |
This bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it. Quote | So the application of COMMON SENSE and inference, from observations from the world around us (information processing systems) might indicate to us certain things having these above PROPERTIES, would fall into the category of things that have been DESIGNED. One of the most intelligent concepts in the known universe is the concept of Evolution itself. |
And, finally, this bit is neither evidence that "information-rich" systems can be produced by non-human intelligent agents, nor an explanation of how one can recognize "new information" when one sees it.
At this point, I think it appropriate to remind you that I have never disputed the proposition that "intelligent agents" can produce "information-rich systems", nor have I ever disputed that there is, indeed, plenty of evidence to support the proposition that "intelligent agents" can produce "information-rich systems".
What I have done, instead, is point out that we have plenty of evidence that "information-rich systems" have been produced by the specific class of "intelligent agents" known as human beings, and, further, that we have no evidence of "information-rich systems" ever having been produced by any "intelligent agents" other than human beings. How, then, can any "system" which existed prior to the emergence of humans, be an "information-rich system"? Are you arguing for time-travel, perhaps?
Likewise, it's appropriate to remind you that I have never disputed the proposition that "new information" exists;; I have, instead, asked you to explain how you recognize this 'new information' stuff when you see it. Since a part of your argumentation is apparently dependent on the properties of "new information", I would have thought that you'd be able to explain how the heck you recognize it when you see it…
|