sledgehammer
Posts: 533
Joined: Sep. 2008
|
Dr1/2 Dodgen weighs in on Barry's butthurt thread: | Quote | | As an engineer in multiple engineering disciplines (software, aeronautical, mechanical) I just try to use simple logic to figure out if stuff can work. The notion that “there is no way to compute the probabilities of evolution” may be true, but one can easily recognize when a proposed engineering solution makes absolutely no sense. |
First of all, Gil, you have no formal training as an engineer, only music and language, which is fine, until you start trying to get mathy, and show the world how little formal training you actually have. Like when you say: | Quote | I don’t need to provide a detailed probabilistic analysis in defense of my proposition. I can just use simple logic in two steps:
1) Converting a Hello World computer program into a word processor is a far less daunting project than converting a bacterium into a person who can write Hello World computer program and convert it into a word processor.
2) I’ve demonstrated with simple mathematical calculations that even with the entire probabilistic resources of the universe available, and even with intelligent, purpose-driven selection with a goal in mind, the goal of converting a Hello World computer program into a word processor could not possibly be achieved through random errors filtered by purposeful selection. |
So why wouldn't you demonstrate this simple mathematical calculation on Lizzie's blog for everyone to see and criticize?
Because it's bullshit, and you might actually realize this.
Here's a simple mathematical calculation that shows it's bullshit:
I start with your "Hello World" program and duplicate it until I get 100Mbytes, or the size of a given word processor source code, (or I could just as well start with 100M of random ASCII characters). Using KF's latching weasel algorithm, I compare that random code to the actual WP code, and surprise, surprise, 1/64th of the (6-bit ASCII) characters match! I keep those and randomize the remainder. Again 1/64th of that random remainder matches the target, so I keep those as well. How many times do I have to do this until all the characters match and I have a WP program?
Simple math. T, the starting 100Mbytes times 63/64 is the unmatched remainder after 1 generation, and 63/64 raised to the power of N, the number of generations, is the unmatched fraction of the original 100MBytes after N generations. When this fraction is less than 1/T, all the characters match. Even an engineer with a little training in engineering math could tell you that this series converges for r<T, and happens when N exceeds:
ln(T)/ln(r/(r-1)),
where r is the alphabet size, and T is the target size.
For T=1e8, r=64, N~1170, so the computer that runs the word processor could find the match in a few microseconds, which is a little less than the ~1e17 seconds you allow, and the universe is spared. Praise the Lord.
Now I know that you will probably try to move the goalposts and claim that it was my intelligence that solved the problem, even though yours was obviously not up to the task, but you should be relieved that your error of 1e23 is a few orders of magnitude less than 1 Dembski (1e27).
And finally, you say: | Quote | In my view, Darwinists are living in a fantasy world, completely disconnected from reality, evidence, and logic concerning the creative powers of their proposed mechanism...
As a final note: I was influenced to a great extent by Phillip Johnson, an attorney. One might ask, What does an attorney have to contribute to the design debate? What a good attorney has to offer is cutting through the fluff, getting to the logic of the argumentation, and pointing out rational inconsistencies.
The most obvious rational inconsistency to me is the proposition that a by-definition purposeless process was purposed.
But then, I’m just an engineer, who tries to use simple logic. |
Well, we've done enough damage to the already poor reputation of engineers, so maybe your logic is a little too "simple"? NB I might have been a little nicer on Lizzie's blog, but you made your choice.
--------------
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny is alleviated by their lack of consistency. -A. Einstein (H/T, JAD)
If evolution is true, you could not know that it's true because your brain is nothing but chemicals. ?Think about that. -K. Hovind
|
