RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < ... 190 191 192 193 194 [195] 196 197 198 199 200 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2012,18:56   

I propose a new unit of measure for the frequency of innane defences of creationism. We'll call it Barrys per Second.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2012,19:29   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Aug. 14 2012,19:18)
Over at the Tard farm Barry Arrogant scores another own goal on the concept of CSI

     
Quote
Barry Arrington:  Let me now coin a new term – the “beaut-L.”  Like the economists’ util, a beaut-L is a unit of beauty.

Now that we have a unit by which we may quantify beauty, can anyone tell me precisely how much more beautiful the São Paulo Cathedral is than the dilapidated shack?  Does the cathedral have beaut-Ls while the shack has only 20 (or negative 20) beaut-Ls?

The answer, of course, is that the question is meaningless.  Any attempt to assign precise mathematical quantities to beauty is facile.  Nevertheless, beauty exists and some objects are more beautiful than other objects.

We can conclude from these examples that our Darwinist friends’ are wrong when they insist that a concept must always be precisely mathematically quantifiable in order for it to be meaningful.  And I further conclude that my inability to assign a quantity of CSI* to Mount Rushmore does not mean that the sculpture does not nevertheless exhibit CSI.


linky

I bet to a poor peasant who could live in the shack but not in the cathedral, the shack would be way more beautiful.

Seems like Barry has admitted the amount of CSI, like the quantity of beauty, is a completely subjective determination and therefore not useful for any objective scientific judgments.

Thank goodness we have idiots for enemies.

Barry is just not aware of what some people will find beautiful.

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 501
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2012,20:16   

Quote (J-Dog @ Aug. 14 2012,16:32)
Oh Yeah?  Well what if they're  frozen, what then?

Joe G Jr....

Oi! Joe G senior, if you please.

If ants are frozen, it takes away the element of surprise. Anyway, they don't have eyebrows, so they can't measure entropy.

When the Big Bang occurred, surprise was at a maximum. If anyone had been around, they would have been fucking surprised. Surprise in the universe has been steadily decreasing since then, by being turned into entropy. I also have a theory about fish.

--------------
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.

The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

  
REC



Posts: 567
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2012,22:52   

Quote (Paul Flocken @ Aug. 14 2012,19:29)
Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Aug. 14 2012,19:18)
Over at the Tard farm Barry Arrogant scores another own goal on the concept of CSI

       
Quote
Barry Arrington:  Let me now coin a new term – the “beaut-L.”  Like the economists’ util, a beaut-L is a unit of beauty.

Now that we have a unit by which we may quantify beauty, can anyone tell me precisely how much more beautiful the São Paulo Cathedral is than the dilapidated shack?  Does the cathedral have beaut-Ls while the shack has only 20 (or negative 20) beaut-Ls?

The answer, of course, is that the question is meaningless.  Any attempt to assign precise mathematical quantities to beauty is facile.  Nevertheless, beauty exists and some objects are more beautiful than other objects.

We can conclude from these examples that our Darwinist friends’ are wrong when they insist that a concept must always be precisely mathematically quantifiable in order for it to be meaningful.  And I further conclude that my inability to assign a quantity of CSI* to Mount Rushmore does not mean that the sculpture does not nevertheless exhibit CSI.


linky

I bet to a poor peasant who could live in the shack but not in the cathedral, the shack would be way more beautiful.

Seems like Barry has admitted the amount of CSI, like the quantity of beauty, is a completely subjective determination and therefore not useful for any objective scientific judgments.

Thank goodness we have idiots for enemies.

Barry is just not aware of what some people will find beautiful.

Barry:

Quote
Let us set aside for the moment that CSI is often subject to rigorous mathematical definition and calculation (as Kairosfocus has demonstrated several times).


KF? Fucking KF is your reference? In his rambling ppps posts? Not Dembski or anyone semi-sane? Are the leaders of ID in hiding, or did they collectively die of their perpetual embarrassments?

KF's definition that selects a specification (circularly specifying the specification in determining if something is specified)?

  
k.e..



Posts: 2873
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,03:11   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Aug. 15 2012,02:48)
are they really so quick, now, to admit that they can't measure CSI?  I really really really doubt it.   Given how hilarious THAT shit was

Yeah they really flagellated themselves with that one.

Typical fundy mind fuck.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4238
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,06:24   

Barry:
Quote
*I hereby coin another term — ceezi (pronounced “seez eye”) for a unit of CSI.  No?  OK.

Can't these guys get anything right?

The unit of CSI is the cezi, pronounced "says I."

As in "this object has CSI. Says I."

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

  
Patrick



Posts: 549
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,08:55   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Aug. 14 2012,19:18)
Over at the Tard farm Barry Arrogant scores another own goal on the concept of CSI

     
Quote
Barry Arrington:  Let me now coin a new term – the “beaut-L.”  Like the economists’ util, a beaut-L is a unit of beauty.

Now that we have a unit by which we may quantify beauty, can anyone tell me precisely how much more beautiful the São Paulo Cathedral is than the dilapidated shack?  Does the cathedral have beaut-Ls while the shack has only 20 (or negative 20) beaut-Ls?

The answer, of course, is that the question is meaningless.  Any attempt to assign precise mathematical quantities to beauty is facile.  Nevertheless, beauty exists and some objects are more beautiful than other objects.

We can conclude from these examples that our Darwinist friends’ are wrong when they insist that a concept must always be precisely mathematically quantifiable in order for it to be meaningful.  And I further conclude that my inability to assign a quantity of CSI* to Mount Rushmore does not mean that the sculpture does not nevertheless exhibit CSI.


linky

I bet to a poor peasant who could live in the shack but not in the cathedral, the shack would be way more beautiful.

Seems like Barry has admitted the amount of CSI, like the quantity of beauty, is a completely subjective determination and therefore not useful for any objective scientific judgments.

Thank goodness we have idiots for enemies.

Dembski disagrees.  His description of CSI makes it clear that he considers it a quantitative, measurable metric.  I would like to see his response to Barry.

This is also being discussed over on Lizzie's blog, thanks to Neil Rickert.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:00   

CSI is measurable!

For example, did you know that an Aardvark is defined by 1010 bits of information?

No, it's true!

And furthermore, if you want to find out if an object is designed or not all you have to do is recreate that object and like magic - you've just shown it's designed.

It's lucky that professor Joe is on UD to set everybody straight.



ROFL.

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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3282
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:10   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Aug. 15 2012,11:00)
CSI is measurable!

For example, did you know that an Aardvark is defined by 1010 bits of information?

No, it's true!

And furthermore, if you want to find out if an object is designed or not all you have to do is recreate that object and like magic - you've just shown it's designed.

It's lucky that professor Joe is on UD to set everybody straight.



ROFL.

So, if it's in latin... Orycteropus afer it has more information?

What if it's this aardvark?



Or this one



Which has more information?  No wonder I'm so confused.  

JoeG is a suck teacher.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10094
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:19   

This is where Joe shows his magnificent creationist plumage. He was utterly spanked over the CSI of CAEK. He knows what he's writing is wrong, and why it's wrong. And he repeats it, knowingly.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2009....ed.html

(He even uses the same example)


CREATIONIST.

--------------
"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

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:30   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,12:19)
This is where Joe shows his magnificent creationist plumage. He was utterly spanked over the CSI of CAEK. He knows what he's writing is wrong, and why it's wrong. And he repeats it, knowingly.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2009.......ed.html

(He even uses the same example)


CREATIONIST.

and he knowingly repeats it in a subtarded style that never gets old

gossip whoring attention queen joe just needs that attention. See if you can get him to write 10,000 words over it



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:38   

HOLY SHIT GUYS I JUST REALIZED JOE HAS PROVED ID

check it, here hit this thing first get you a swarp of moomoo

OK NOW:  what you do is you got something and you figure out how the simplest way to make it is

Got that OK, well the evomat homogay random chance worshipping athiest hypothesis is that

Quote
Nature and chance, operating freely


can build everything via RM + NS

IOW ya see they are retarded

Their our 35 characters in

Quote
Nature and chance, operating freely


meaning 175 bits of functional CSI that the chance worshippers can't account for, in the simplest hypothesis possible.

Checkmate, athiests



Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Aug. 15 2012,12:40

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10094
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,11:48   

Someone get a link to Joe's origional Tardus Opus at Untelligent Reasoning up at UD, please.

--------------
"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

  
Patrick



Posts: 549
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,12:39   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,12:48)
Someone get a link to Joe's origional Tardus Opus at Untelligent Reasoning up at UD, please.

Oh yes, please.  Joe vs Barry in the tardagon!

  
Joe G



Posts: 1324
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:16   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,11:19)
This is where Joe shows his magnificent creationist plumage. He was utterly spanked over the CSI of CAEK. He knows what he's writing is wrong, and why it's wrong. And he repeats it, knowingly.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2009.......ed.html

(He even uses the same example)


CREATIONIST.

So I got "spanked" because you are an ignorant fucking faggot?

How does that work, exactly?

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10094
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:43   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 15 2012,13:16)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,11:19)
This is where Joe shows his magnificent creationist plumage. He was utterly spanked over the CSI of CAEK. He knows what he's writing is wrong, and why it's wrong. And he repeats it, knowingly.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2009.......ed.html

(He even uses the same example)


CREATIONIST.

So I got "spanked" because you are an ignorant fucking faggot?

How does that work, exactly?

Go post the link to your thread at UD, if you're so proud, CAEKGURL!

I count you getting shredded at least 10 different ways, with no coherent response.

Edited by Richardthughes on Aug. 15 2012,13:43

--------------
"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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3282
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,14:46   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,13:43)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 15 2012,13:16)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 15 2012,11:19)
This is where Joe shows his magnificent creationist plumage. He was utterly spanked over the CSI of CAEK. He knows what he's writing is wrong, and why it's wrong. And he repeats it, knowingly.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2009.......ed.html

(He even uses the same example)


CREATIONIST.

So I got "spanked" because you are an ignorant fucking faggot?

How does that work, exactly?

Go post the link to your thread at UD, if you're so proud, CAEKGURL!

I count you getting shredded at least 10 different ways, with no coherent response.

Because a recipe is not 'the thing' Joe.

Why is that hard to understand?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,14:56   

Joe can have his caek and eat it too.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,14:58   

Quote
One thing you can be sure of — when lots of people quickly respond to you, you have made a fool of yourself hit a nerve.


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-430084

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,15:05   

KF:
 
Quote
CS: Pardon, it is not just bits, it is bits that do a specific job [which is true of engineering designs in general], i.e a reasonably representative portrait of four specific historical figures of note in the US. It is not just complexity but specification AT THE SAME TIME. That’s what puts you into a special zone of a config space that the only credible way to get to, is by intelligent, active info. KF


Not just bits.

Special bits!

Code Sample
010001110110111101110010011001000110111101101110001000000100110101110101011011000110110001

101001011011100110011101110011001000000110100101110011001000000110000101101110001000000100

100101000100011010010110111101110100


FFS.

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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,15:44   

010001110110111101110010011001000110111101101110001000000100110101110101011011000110110001
101001011011100110011101110011001000000110100101110011001000000110000101101110001000000100
100101000100011010010110111101110100001011000010000001100001011011100110010000100000011100
110110111100100000011010010111001100100000010001000110010101110010011100100110100101100101
011100100110010101101001011011100110011101110100011011110110111000101110

Must be the work of intelligence.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,15:56   

well hell i actually jumped off the wagon for that one.  and man i'm glad i did, i'm overcome by the sticky tarden gold goodness of this, the sweet dark derp tarp of the hard tard,  silent and completely dumb

but barry is what happens when you marry a lying liar chickenshit thug lawyer to the postmodern arm of the religious fundamentalists, the creationists

count the straw men

Quote
One of our Darwinist friends’ favorite tactics is to insist that if something cannot be precisely quantified in mathematical terms then there is no warrant for believing it exists at all.  


"Darwinist"--  how retarded.  But the fool intends to imply (i think) "materialist", which is even stupider.  Barry confuses the idea of the throbbing penis for the throbbing penis itself, and that is the root of creationism in general.  

"friends"--  when they aren't gay hitlers denying christ for allah.  friends.  FFS

"warrant"--  the root of their absurd epistemology is not about how we know things, as in "science", but how can they justify their faith to believe those things to be true, despite the evidence that they are false.  

"it exists at all"--  again the idea of the hairy root mistaken for the hairy root itself.  it would get old to party with barry i bet he would keep asking you to hand him that lite beer instead of a fucking lite beer all night long.  

they seriously believe evolutionary biology deals with questions at the level of detail implied by "did a dinosar evolve to be a bullfrog then a chicken".

barry mischaracterizes things he doesn't even understand to begin with.  what a maroon

Quote
For example, ID proponents might point out that Mount Rushmore exhibits complex specified information (“CSI”).  “How much CSI does Mount Rushmore exhibit?” a Darwinist might ask.  “Oh, you can’t give me a figure?  Then CSI obviously does not exist.”


"ID proponents"--  no let's be honest the scenario you are describing is better captured instead by "incredibly stupid and/or dishonest people".  

"point out"--  seriously, no "ID proponents" "point out" this shit ever.  It's not "pointed out", it's claimed, and more accurately claimed on the basis of no evidence provided than an appeal to "emotion" or "common sense" which are categorically fallacious and cannot be true.

"exhibits complex specified information"--  let's be honest, you don't know what in the fuck this means.  "exhibits" to who?  Oh that's right everyone except "Darwinists" who are "without excuse".  I see

"How much"--actually, much more is asked.  "how do you know", "how do you measure it", "what are the units of measurement", "how does this measure vary among populations of samples", etc etc etc. but you don't give a fuck right barrry LOL lying for ID jaysus

"you can't give me a figure"-- not only that, we know 1)  you can't in principle, b/c it's bullshit.  2) you can't in practice because YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT YOURSELF  3)  Your failure to provide a "figure" is not only a quantitative estimate but also even a verbal model of "CSI".  There ain't nothing left in the sack hoss

"CSI obviously does not exist"--  give it a name and it must exist right what is this 900 bc?  all anyone can say  is that YOU have failed to demonstrate that your "CSI" is anything other than handwaving nonsense, because it ain't.

LOL u mad barry thats why you post this sorta bullshit aint it

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Patrick



Posts: 549
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,16:08   

mphillips is on a hiding to nothing:
Quote
As there are plenty of three dimensional object descriptions available would it be possible for you to describe, in pseudocode, the algorithm for how you would go about converting a given set of these “digitized charts” into a specific value of CSI?

File formats that may be of interest here include MD3 and VRML.

I’d be interested to attempt to program such a utility, if you could describe a potential in principle implementation.


Gee, what happened the last time someone offered to do that?

He does get in a link to Joe's cake post a few comments later, though.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,16:25   

then gordon mullings jumps in and tards some predictably stupid irrelevant masturbatory bullshit and i lost my firm desire to probe the rest of the thread

ETA--  hold on this guy is offering to calculate it for them if they can just tell him what it "is".  

That will never end well.  Gordon Mullings of Manjack Heights Montserrat will immediately and in exceeding and excruciating detail tell you that you are a very bad person for this.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Aug. 15 2012,17:30

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,18:48   

Words of wisdom. No need to say whose they are. It should be obvious.

Quote
1: Can you accurately and fairly sum up the argument in a short sentence or two? If not, then there is an issue of comprehension. I assume you can.


--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4361
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,18:52   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2012,14:56)
Joe can have his caek and eat it too.

Oh yeah?  What if it's Frozen - What then???

Joe G Jr.

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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,19:19   

Quote (J-Dog @ Aug. 15 2012,18:52)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2012,14:56)
Joe can have his caek and eat it too.

Oh yeah?  What if it's Frozen - What then???

Joe G Jr.

He still eats it.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,19:37   

Since this answers Barry's/WLC's pig-ignorant strawman attack (whatever Ayala wrote--don't know, don't care, the real point is what evolution predicts), and I don't trust IDiots to approve this response made to WLC's idiocy on Youtube, I'm copying said response to here:

 
Quote
The problem with that strawman is that life's second-rate designs are not due to sloppy or poor thinking, let alone poor workmanship.  They are due to evolutionary limitations, especially the matter of heredity.  Archaeopteryx was limited to rather incomplete adaptations of dinosaur structure and function, and was thus not much of a flier.  Mammalian testes descend from their internal ancestral position.  Neither exhibits design at all.

Life could not have been designed by a bungler.


It's always the same stupid strawman, they don't care what sort of bad design appears in life--the kind predicted by evolutionary limitations/local optima--nor that they claim that life would require superior intelligence and it's a fact that it would require extremely great knowledge to design life (and thus such a one would not be expected to make the elementary mistakes that evolution makes), they just blather on about generalities rather than caring about the specifics.  The latter destroy ID.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3282
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,20:36   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Aug. 15 2012,15:05)
KF:
 
Quote
CS: Pardon, it is not just bits, it is bits that do a specific job [which is true of engineering designs in general], i.e a reasonably representative portrait of four specific historical figures of note in the US. It is not just complexity but specification AT THE SAME TIME. That’s what puts you into a special zone of a config space that the only credible way to get to, is by intelligent, active info. KF


Not just bits.

Special bits!

Code Sample
010001110110111101110010011001000110111101101110001000000100110101110101011011000110110001


101001011011100110011101110011001000000110100101110011001000000110000101101110001000000100


100101000100011010010110111101110100


FFS.

Someone (not me, someone with actual photoshop and art skills) should do a CSI Cereal... full of special bits of information.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,20:58   

Honey Bits and Bytes. Full of  number crunching ones and zeroes.

Spell secret words your mother can't read with our naughty bits. Coder ring inside.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < ... 190 191 192 193 194 [195] 196 197 198 199 200 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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