RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (500) < ... 260 261 262 263 264 [265] 266 267 268 269 270 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 2, general discussion of Dembski's site< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,08:53   

Quote (GCUGreyArea @ Mar. 25 2009,08:36)
 Even when bad traits exist they don't always disappear overnight and the example of blind fish might be an example of a trait slowly being removed. - give it another million years and the only sign of eyes might be some genetic fragments.

yeah... but it's just not fair that you bring this up because blind cave fish aren't mentioned in the bible Sal's Science Book.  :)

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:01   

Where Sal goes you can be sure "unwitting support for ID" is not far behind
Quote
Natural selection has been unwittingly refuted by some of it’s proponents such as Fisher and Haldane.

Tard

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:17   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Mar. 25 2009,14:28)
What I want to know is where BarryA has been through all this. Clive has made hash out of his intentions and, increasingly, a fool out of Barry.

(RB's perverted narcissistic fantasy: BarryA clawing at his shiny pate, screaming "I HATE that fucking Reciprocating Bill! Goddammit he's RIGHT!! Why does he have to be RIGHT?!" He then reinstates me out of principle.)

(More likely: "Fuck that asshole. Fuck all those assholes.")

That would explain the hair on the palm of his hand.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:21   

Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 25 2009,15:19)
Quote
kairosfocus: A further note is the cluster of reversions captured in the proximity example just above:
Quote
Gen 600: meuainks it is like a weasel fit: 92%
Gen 700: methinks it isrlike a wejrel fit: 89%
Gen 800: methsnkr it is tike a weasel fit: 89%
Gen 900: methineswit ts likeaa wequel fit: 78%

Observe, here, the overt instability of multiple letters and spaces, and how that is easily captured in a skipped-generation sample. This tends to reinforce the point that in Weasel 1986, the observed o/p latching pattern is real, not a mere artifact of sampling.

Of course, kairosfocus is grasping at straws. In a population of 500 and a mutation rate of only 5%, at least some children in each generation will almost certainly be exact clones of the mother. As such, there is very little chance of a step back in fitness.

(The expected rate is only 28*5% = 1.4 mutations per child. There's a 95% chance at each site to *not* experience a mutation, so there is a 95%^28 = 24% chance for any particular child to be mutation free.)

Quote
kairosfocus: On a matter that is distasteful but important to cirrect the tendency of seelctive hyperskepticism using ad hominems that divert the thread adn poison its atmosphere.

No, I think Apollo just has a bug. Methinks had one too. Sneaky moma was slipping into the new generation. It looked right, but I noticed that fitness never declined even with small populations.

Kairosfocus on the other hand ...

And Kariosblindness is on soma.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:25   

Quote (Louis @ Mar. 25 2009,14:58)
Quote (Hermagoras @ Mar. 25 2009,04:20)
Quote (SoonerintheBluegrass @ Mar. 24 2009,22:15)
From a bit back, courtesy of Erasmus:

   
Quote
by the way this means that Ayn Rand's books are chock full of CSI!!!!  also gulag archipelago and war and peace.


So what would be the FSCI or CSI (or FDIC, or FSLIC, or Bayern Leverkusen FC or whatever) of Finnegan's Wake?  And how long will it take Joe to bake his CSI: Seattle (This fall on CBS starring Dr. Dr. Dembski, Casey Luskin and Dense O'Leary!) cake?*

*Feeling a bit loopy on the lovely cough syrup given for a touch of bronchitis.  FSM  bless prescribed narcotics!

Minor correction.  Finnegans Wake -- no apostrophe in the title.  

Sorry: I'm a jerk that way.  And I did my undergrad thesis on the Wake.

I don't believe you. No one has ever read Finnegans Wake. There's reasonable doubt it was ever written.

;-)

Louis

yeah sure.


Unless you can do  a pint of paint thinners each day for 28 years I suggest you redact  that libel you fat Welsh son of a greek {or turkish} female goat and lover of punjabi puntang!

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:27   

Quote (sparc @ Mar. 25 2009,00:26)
Just out of curiosity:
Has anybody seen bornagain77 at UD recently?

Nope. All's quiet on the Pharyngula front, too.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:28   

Quote (FrankH @ Mar. 25 2009,15:59)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Mar. 25 2009,06:28)
What I want to know is where BarryA has been through all this. Clive has made hash out of his intentions and, increasingly, a fool out of Barry.

(RB's perverted narcissistic fantasy: BarryA clawing at his shiny pate, screaming "I HATE that fucking Reciprocating Bill! Goddammit he's RIGHT!! Why does he have to be RIGHT?!" He then reinstates me out of principle.)

(More likely: "Fuck that asshole. Fuck all those assholes.")

Wondering why k.e. didn't pick up on this as this sounds so amazingly gay.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Unless you're not into it and somebody's trying to do that to you.

Then that's bad.

It was TOO obvious!

<snikker>

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,09:32   

Quote (GCUGreyArea @ Mar. 25 2009,16:36)
scordova proclaims here:
     
Quote
...“Natural Selection” can select defective organism over healthy ones (such as blind cave fish, wingless beetles, etc. etc.). This is not consitent with Darwin’s notion of “good”. In fact, “good” and “bad” are deeply metaphorical.

If it doesn't need eyes then not having working eyes is not a defect is it!  'Good' and 'Bad' are relative to the environment, Natural selection selects for 'good' traits in their immediate historical context and against 'bad' traits.  It does not select against traits that make no difference.  Even when bad traits exist they don't always disappear overnight and the example of blind fish might be an example of a trait slowly being removed. - give it another million years and the only sign of eyes might be some genetic fragments.

Scordova confuses his own notion of 'Good' and 'Bad' with what it means in terms of reproductive probabilities.

Which would explain why he still wears a red leather jacket to knight clubs and wonders why he only speaks to old men.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:11   

Quote
hazel: When you climb a mountain, you occasionally go downhill before going up again.

Joseph: And I bet they don’t refer to such a process as “cumulative climbing”.

Um, yes they {walkers, runners, bikers, climbers} do.

Walkers: ‘Easy' means that the cumulative height climbed during the walk is less than 300ft ‘Moderate' means that the cumulative climb is between 300ft and 1000ft and ‘hilly' means the cumulative climb is over 1000ft.

Runners: The cumulative climb for this run is 16,000 feet and only two people have completed this challenging run!

Bikers: From the trail head, it's about 1.5 miles to the new bridge. There are some technical switchbacks on the 5 climbs of this section (cumulative climb 800 feet).

Climbers: My avocet watch indicated a cumulative climb of 28,650ft. We read the words on the summit memorial to the 2 skiers killed by avalanche in 1988.



--------------

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:21   

Denyse, unlike the president, doesn't make efforts to know what she is talking about before she talks:
 
Quote
Phineas Gage: Evolution of a lecture room psychopath
O'Leary

I was at dinner the other week with a voluble atheist religion professor who, in defense of a materialist view of the human mind, raised the subject of Phineas Gage (1823-1860). Ah yes, the man whose personality changed completely after a horrific accident, a staple of Introductory Psychology...

What Denyse fails to note, and apparently fails to know, is that there is a huge and incontrovertible clinical and research literature, accumulated over the last 100 years, documenting the superficially subtle but often pragmatically devastating impact of frontal lobe and pre-frontal brain injury. Gage's injury made clear that the frontal lobes are not "silent" areas of the brain (as was often asserted at the time), but rather are crucially important to governance of executive functioning, planning, and self and social awareness. Persons with frontal lobe damage are often unable to organize and prioritize their actions, becoming bogged down in irrelevancies, perseverate inappropriately, and display terrible interpersonal and business judgement, reflecting permanent personality changes. Injury to the frontal lobes can result in complete disability even when IQ is largely intact due to disruption in these crucial metacognitive skills. Neuropsychological testing is very sensitive to these forms of impairment.

Indeed, Denyse and Mario, in The Spatula Brain, explicitly acknowledge the importance of these structures. From my AtBC/Amazon review (which is now rated the most helpful critical review of the book posted on Amazon):
         
Quote
Most damaging to the aims of this book are the "own goals" that Beauregard and O'Leary inadvertently score. Indeed, they repeatedly score "own goals" with respect to the central, dualistic thesis of the book: that mind and brain differ, and that mind controls and modifies brain. Beauregard and O'Leary cite the example of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). "My friend an colleague Jeffrey Schwartz, a nonmaterialist UCLA neuropsychiatrist, started working with OCD sufferers in the 1980s because he sensed that OCD was a clear case of an intact mind troubled by a malfunctioning brain." Schwartz determined by means of scans the cortical and subcortical brain circuitry that appears to underlie OCD, and devised a "mindfulness" treatment protocol that draws upon cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy to treat the disorder. When treatment succeeded, "he was not simply getting patients to change their opinions, but rather to actually change their brains. He wanted them to substitute a useful neural circuit for a useless one....in this therapy, the patient is entirely in control. Both the existence and the role of the mind as independent of the brain are accepted; indeed, that is the basis of the therapy's success" (p. 130). Further neuroimaging disclosed areas of patients' brains that displayed modified activity following treatment.

The problem with all this is that the imaging in fact disclosed something quite other than minds operating independently of brains. By means of imaging, "Schwartz noted that the most recent (and thus most sophisticated) prefrontal parts of the human brain, in evolutionary terms, are almost entirely unaffected by OCD. That is why patients perceive compulsions as alien. They are alien to the most characteristically human parts of the brain. To the extend that the patient's reasoning power and sense of identity remain largely intact, they can actively cooperate with their therapy" (p. 128).

There you have it. Reasoning power and sense of identity are hosted by recently evolved prefrontal areas of the human brain, those areas that render us most characteristically human. We know that the human brain is organized hierarchically, with loops of regulation culminating in highly abstract frontal modeling and monitoring of self relative to one's physical and social environment and related goals, and we know that prefrontal areas of the brain are crucial to these high level representational and planning activities. Schwartz's imaging again confirms this view. The upshot of this research is not that a mind independent of brain monitors and modifies that brain; rather, this imaging confirms once again that the brain regulates and modifies itself by means of these neurally instantiated high level representations of self. Own goal. Similar own goals are evident in Beauregard's description of his scans of subjects asked to "down regulate" emotions, sexual arousal, etc., all of which demonstrate the marshaling of highly specific frontal areas to accomplish the tasks that Beauregard insists upon interpreting as mind acting upon brain. And, because we note that the cortical areas that host these crucially human functions are recently evolved, *some version of evolutionary psychology must in fact be correct*, Beauregard and O'Leary's repeated dismissals of this new discipline notwithstanding.

Denyse herself has become bogged down in irrelevancies, apparently asserting that because Gage's life may be become embroidered over the years that there is reason to doubt that human cognition and human personality are somehow only tangential to the human brain.

She's wrong.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:29   

Quote (Maya @ Mar. 25 2009,08:14)
 
Quote (Nils Ruhr @ Mar. 25 2009,07:45)
   
Quote (Hermagoras @ Mar. 25 2009,07:22)
New UD post.  ReMine on "message theory" Part 2. Because Part 1 wasn't stupid enough.

please explain what's so "stupid" about his post.

Actually, where his post focused on testability, and the fact that ID isn't a testable theory, it wasn't bad.  In fact, it sounded more like Reciprocating Bill than most of the IDiots at UD will like.

What's stupid are the claims in his book.  See the talk.origins archives for details.

Right.  The first part of the post was ok, but the part about Message Theory (always capitalized) was just a plug for the book as ID's savior redemption moment of respectability, and a set of excuses for why you can't find Message Theory in scientific papers.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:33   

Quote (k.e.. @ Mar. 25 2009,09:21)
Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 25 2009,15:19)
Quote
kairosfocus: A further note is the cluster of reversions captured in the proximity example just above:
 
Quote
Gen 600: meuainks it is like a weasel fit: 92%
Gen 700: methinks it isrlike a wejrel fit: 89%
Gen 800: methsnkr it is tike a weasel fit: 89%
Gen 900: methineswit ts likeaa wequel fit: 78%

Observe, here, the overt instability of multiple letters and spaces, and how that is easily captured in a skipped-generation sample. This tends to reinforce the point that in Weasel 1986, the observed o/p latching pattern is real, not a mere artifact of sampling.

Of course, kairosfocus is grasping at straws. In a population of 500 and a mutation rate of only 5%, at least some children in each generation will almost certainly be exact clones of the mother. As such, there is very little chance of a step back in fitness.

(The expected rate is only 28*5% = 1.4 mutations per child. There's a 95% chance at each site to *not* experience a mutation, so there is a 95%^28 = 24% chance for any particular child to be mutation free.)

 
Quote
kairosfocus: On a matter that is distasteful but important to cirrect the tendency of seelctive hyperskepticism using ad hominems that divert the thread adn poison its atmosphere.

No, I think Apollo just has a bug. Methinks had one too. Sneaky moma was slipping into the new generation. It looked right, but I noticed that fitness never declined even with small populations.

Kairosfocus on the other hand ...

And Kariosblindness is on soma.

Not only did I read it, I read it aloud.  Stem to stern, Shem to Shaun, soaup to neuts.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:36   

Allowed?

Is there any other way to say something?

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,10:46   

Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 25 2009,18:11)
 
Quote
hazel: When you climb a mountain, you occasionally go downhill before going up again.

Joseph: And I bet they don’t refer to such a process as “cumulative climbing”.

Um, yes they {walkers, runners, bikers, climbers} do.

Walkers: ‘Easy' means that the cumulative height climbed during the walk is less than 300ft ‘Moderate' means that the cumulative climb is between 300ft and 1000ft and ‘hilly' means the cumulative climb is over 1000ft.

Runners: The cumulative climb for this run is 16,000 feet and only two people have completed this challenging run!

Bikers: From the trail head, it's about 1.5 miles to the new bridge. There are some technical switchbacks on the 5 climbs of this section (cumulative climb 800 feet).

Climbers: My avocet watch indicated a cumulative climb of 28,650ft. We read the words on the summit memorial to the 2 skiers killed by avalanche in 1988.


You gotta laff. (at UD tard)

WHO'S DA MAN, HU RAJ!

Has any man been closer to heaven on earth?

Just think Clive clone of Dave Tard if you even levitated off that cheezy poof littered floating command post floor by 2 inches you would nearly be 28,000 ft closer to heaven than your erstwhile chums over at the UD TARD BAZAR and over 28,000 ft closer to hell than Zac's been.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,11:24   

The "Apollo" non-weasel program does have bugs, at least when compiled with

i686-apple-darwin9-g++-4.0.1 (GCC) 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5490)

"Apollo" defines a convenience macro, fRand():

Code Sample

#define fRand() (float)rand() / (RAND_MAX + 1)


And the result is compared to the mutation rate:

Code Sample

 if( fRand() < mrate)


Unfortunately, that will always be true, and every position in every child mutates.

A simple check of the convenience function would have revealed this.

Code Sample

for (int i = 0; i < 5000000; i++) {
   myrand = fRand();
   frsum += myrand;
   if (frmin > myrand) {
     frmin = myrand;
   }
   if (frmax < myrand) {
     frmax = myrand;
   }
 }

 fravg = frsum / 5000000;
 cout << "fRand() test, n= 5000000, min = " << frmin << ", avg. = " << fravg << ", max = " << frmax << endl;


Results:

Code Sample

fRand() test, n= 5000000, min = -1, avg. = -0.500177, max = -3.99072e-07


The fix is simple:

Code Sample

#include <cmath>

[...]

#define fRand() fabs( (float)rand() / (RAND_MAX + 1) )


Once one gets away from getting a random number in [0..1], there's another big problem: "Apollo"'s non-weasel doesn't consistently use the winner of the last generation to be the parent of the new generation. Instead, "Apollo"'s code only allows a winner to generate so many of the new generation as its index in the population array.

Code Sample

     for( int i = 0; i < popSize; i++ )
       {
         pop[i] = pop[winner];


Once i > winner, what is used as a template for additional candidates in the new population is the just-mutated new candidate at the winner index. This means that every time that the first candidate in a population wins, whatever mutation that happens to it will be the basis for the whole new population. This isn't a "weasel".

Once that is fixed, the program is finding the target string in around 23 generations, it looks like.

Checking one's own work takes some discipline, but it beats having other people point out obvious errors.

ETA: clarification, grammar fix.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Mar. 25 2009,12:09

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,11:52   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 25 2009,09:24)
Code Sample

     for( int i = 0; i < popSize; i++ )
       {
         pop[i] = pop[winner];


Once i > winner, what is used as a template for additional candidates in the new population is the just-mutated new candidate at i. This means that every time that the first candidate in a population wins, whatever mutation that happens to it will be the basis for the whole new population.

Wow.  How embarrassing for Apollo.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,11:53   

How many Dembskis of error does this provide? can we tell?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,12:05   

Allen MacNeill joins the boycott.  
Quote
Given that I have only limited time to prepare and research the posts and comments I make online, I will no longer be posting comments at Uncommon Descent.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,12:09   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Mar. 25 2009,12:05)
Allen MacNeill joins the boycott.  
Quote
Given that I have only limited time to prepare and research the posts and comments I make online, I will no longer be posting comments at Uncommon Descent.

above linked broken for me.

here in full:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-309742

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,12:17   

Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 25 2009,07:19)
 
Quote
kairosfocus: A further note is the cluster of reversions captured in the proximity example just above:
 
Quote
Gen 600: meuainks it is like a weasel fit: 92%
Gen 700: methinks it isrlike a wejrel fit: 89%
Gen 800: methsnkr it is tike a weasel fit: 89%
Gen 900: methineswit ts likeaa wequel fit: 78%

Observe, here, the overt instability of multiple letters and spaces, and how that is easily captured in a skipped-generation sample. This tends to reinforce the point that in Weasel 1986, the observed o/p latching pattern is real, not a mere artifact of sampling.

Of course, kairosfocus is grasping at straws. In a population of 500 and a mutation rate of only 5%, at least some children in each generation will almost certainly be exact clones of the mother. As such, there is very little chance of a step back in fitness.


Mullings is relying on the busted "Apollo" program to disparage Dawkins? Mullings doesn't have enough grasp of the statistics to recognize that there must have been an error in the program generating the output that he accepts credulously.

This is a common pattern in religious antievolution argumentation. The most transparently bogus results will be cherished rather than checked. It happened with the Dembski/Marks Matlab fiasco, and seems to be happening again now.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,12:57   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 25 2009,11:53)
How many Dembskis of error does this provide? can we tell?

I think we have a winner here.

Just as we have units of various forces and such in Webers, Telsas, Guass and more, I hereby nominate "Units of Error" to be known as Dembskis.

Bravo sir!

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
Richard Simons



Posts: 425
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:00   

Isn't Apollo supposed to be their star programmer? Perhaps they should have got Dave to do it before he left.

How long will it be before it is corrected? How long before a correction is acknowledged? How long before the corrected version filters down to the likes of KF?

Edit: the comment sent itself before I had finished (stupid computers).

--------------
All sweeping statements are wrong.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:01   

Quote (FrankH @ Mar. 25 2009,12:57)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 25 2009,11:53)
How many Dembskis of error does this provide? can we tell?

I think we have a winner here.

Just as we have units of various forces and such in Webers, Telsas, Guass and more, I hereby nominate "Units of Error" to be known as Dembskis.

Bravo sir!

Uh, where have you been?

Quote

Error in dembskis

That error might be measured in a unit called "dembskis" that scaled things in terms of orders of magnitude came up in discussion of errors in an essay by Marks and Dembski. The reference unit of error for the measure is taken from the case mentioned above in the M/N ratio calculation note, where Dembski had an error of about 65 orders of magnitude. "Dave W." formalized the notion with an equation, and W. Kevin Vicklund suggested using a rounded-off value of 150 as the constant in the denominator, based upon Dembski's figure of 10^150 as a universal small probability. Thus, the final form of quantifying error in dembskis (Reed Cartwright proposed the symbol ?) is

? = | ln(erroneous measure) - ln(correct measure) | / 150

There is not yet a consensus on what to term the unit, but two proposals being considered are "Dmb" and "duns".


--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:12   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 25 2009,13:01)
Quote (FrankH @ Mar. 25 2009,12:57)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 25 2009,11:53)
How many Dembskis of error does this provide? can we tell?
I think we have a winner here.

Just as we have units of various forces and such in Webers, Telsas, Guass and more, I hereby nominate "Units of Error" to be known as Dembskis.

Bravo sir!
Uh, where have you been?
Quote

Error in dembskis

That error might be measured in a unit called "dembskis" that scaled things in terms of orders of magnitude came up in discussion of errors in an essay by Marks and Dembski. The reference unit of error for the measure is taken from the case mentioned above in the M/N ratio calculation note, where Dembski had an error of about 65 orders of magnitude. "Dave W." formalized the notion with an equation, and W. Kevin Vicklund suggested using a rounded-off value of 150 as the constant in the denominator, based upon Dembski's figure of 10^150 as a universal small probability. Thus, the final form of quantifying error in dembskis (Reed Cartwright proposed the symbol ?) is

? = | ln(erroneous measure) - ln(correct measure) | / 150

There is not yet a consensus on what to term the unit, but two proposals being considered are "Dmb" and "duns".

It would seem I was under a rock.

I've never seen that before.

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
sparc



Posts: 2088
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:12   

Quote


57
jerry
03/25/2009
12:36 pm

I hope Allen’s comments get posted immediately. I personally have learned a lot from Allen in the last couple years through what he has said and what he has recommended.
Either Jerry discussed with some other Allen MacNeill or learning has a completely different meaning for him than for the genral public. E.g., their exchange on this thread.

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:16   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Mar. 24 2009,22:53)
 
also, the IDiots should turn their attention to Judaculla Rock

no one else can figure out what it means, perhaps it is a job worthy only of the brain trust that inhabits UD.

It's a cake recipe, isn't it?

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
sparc



Posts: 2088
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:16   

Quote
I've never seen that before.
repression of painful memories?

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
khan



Posts: 1554
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:19   

What happens if the cake is left out in the rain?

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
Jkrebs



Posts: 590
Joined: Sep. 2004

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:24   

Ah, John Davison ...

Quote
I came here to Uncommon Descent specifically to offer an antidote to the atheist inspired Darwinian mysticism being presented by Allen MacNeill. So what does MacNeill do? He promptly disappears. I will let others interpret his departure as they choose. I ssy he didn’t have the stomach for a confrontation. I will continue my pursuit of Allen MacNeill at his weblog - “The Evolution List” as I recently linked.

I thank Uncommon Descent for giving me the opportunity to evoke this expected reaction.

Why don’t you now invite P.Z. Myers or Richard Dawkins to present their versions of the great mystery of phylogeny? I am itching to take them on as well. Only by inviting them can you have the pleasure of seeing them decline.

It doesn’t get any better than this.


What an addition to UD.


Link

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2009,13:27   

Quote (khan @ Mar. 25 2009,13:19)
What happens if the cake is left out in the rain?

Well, RichardtHughes goes to a karaoke bar and indulges his dual interests in cross-dressing and 1970's music.  See his last effort.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
  14997 replies since July 17 2008,19:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (500) < ... 260 261 262 263 264 [265] 266 267 268 269 270 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]