RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (339) < ... 311 312 313 314 315 [316] 317 318 319 320 321 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 5, Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2018,18:27   

If I ever told someone "Genomic science indicates that humans descend not from an individual pair but from a large population.", and they replied, "Then the Scriptural Adam and Eve were the first parents of that large population" I wouldn't be able to say anything. I'd just immediately walk away and forget I ever met them.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2018,18:28   

It's been hours and I'm still shaking my head like a wet dog trying to dry off.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2018,18:32   

Quote
14
critical rationalistJanuary 21, 2018 at 6:15 pm
@KF
Quote

CR, you are increasingly off-topic, and going over ground where you have been cogently answered any number of times.

If you’re mistaken about a subject, couldn’t that lead you to be mistaken as to what is relevant in respect to that same subject?

Nor is it clear what you mean by “cogently answered”. Perhaps we’re talking past each other because you consider argument by definition a cogent answer?


lol

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2158
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2018,19:08   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 21 2018,16:28)
It's been hours and I'm still shaking my head like a wet dog trying to dry off.

:D  :D  :D

   
k.e..



Posts: 4523
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,08:01   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,02:28)
It's been hours and I'm still shaking my head like a wet dog trying to dry off.

"He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee."

Nietzsche

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,10:45   

Quote
1
FourFaces January 21, 2018 at 7:51 pm
What is stranger is that the species that are the most evolved, according to Darwinism, are the ones with the lowest reproductive rates. One would expect the exact opposite if the Darwinist lie was true.


four faces is Teh Most Evolved

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,11:04   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 21 2018,13:13)
Quote
3
harryJanuary 21, 2018 at 11:15 am
 
Quote
Genomic science indicates that humans descend not from an individual pair but from a large population.

Then the Scriptural Adam and Eve were the first parents of that large population, or of an even earlier population of which that population were descendants.

‘Y-chromosome Adam’ may be the earliest male ancestor of humanity currently ascertainable by “genomic science,” and ‘Mitochondrial Eve’ the earliest female ancestor, but those two aren’t the Scriptural Adam and Eve if they aren’t the first parents of all humanity; they are then merely descendants of the Scriptural Adam and Eve.



God-DAMN harry is a dumb motherfucker.

Harry may be dumb, but vmahuna takes it to a new level.
Quote
I remain confused about how ANY new species on Earth goes from zero individuals to the several thousand allegedly needed just to start.

I mean, did the gorillas and aardvarks just wake up one morning and notice that 4,000 FULLY GROWN ADULT homo sapiens were setting up a village out in the savannah? And they had of course evolved overnight due some confluence of thin air?

And if this is true for humans, then surely EVERY other species MUST ALSO have simply appeared POOF! as vast herds and swarms and schools of fish. And what about whales? Did they start as a single pair?

There are creation myths in every nation and tribe around the world. The Hebrew bible is just one version. But ALL human religions say that the first humans (however many varies) were “created” by God (or the gods), and that the creator(s) then stuck around long enough to get all those baby humans started on the road to dominating Earth. And exactly what did 4,000 newborn baby humans EAT? And who exactly KEPT feeding them and rocking them to sleep for the next 5 or 10 years?

Watch “The Blue Lagoon”. It’s a training film for isolated, immature humans who suddenly become parents.


Stupid is as stupid does

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2770
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,11:50   

... and they wonder why no-one takes them seriously.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,12:07   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Jan. 22 2018,12:04)
I remain confused about how ANY new species on Earth goes from zero individuals to the several thousand allegedly needed just to start.

I mean, did the gorillas and aardvarks just wake up one morning and notice that 4,000 FULLY GROWN ADULT homo sapiens were setting up a village out in the savannah? And they had of course evolved overnight due some confluence of thin air?

And if this is true for humans, then surely EVERY other species MUST ALSO have simply appeared POOF! as vast herds and swarms and schools of fish. And what about whales? Did they start as a single pair?

There are creation myths in every nation and tribe around the world. The Hebrew bible is just one version. But ALL human religions say that the first humans (however many varies) were “created” by God (or the gods), and that the creator(s) then stuck around long enough to get all those baby humans started on the road to dominating Earth. And exactly what did 4,000 newborn baby humans EAT? And who exactly KEPT feeding them and rocking them to sleep for the next 5 or 10 years?


   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,13:53   

Quote
12
rvb8January 22, 2018 at 1:41 pm
The BJP party in India these days is in a nationalistic, some say xenophobic furor.

Anything Hindu, Indian, and vaguely sciency is in, anything colonial, and with colonial and Muslim (apparently the Taj Mahal is a Hindu work??), connections is discredited.

Thankfully higher education in India is rigorous, and this religiously based nonsense will be exposed for just that, religiously based nonsense.

Parallels can be drawn with Recip Tyipp Erdogan’s Turkey. He is also using religion and nationalism to protect, ‘Turkish Science’ (whatever the hell that is), and beliefs.

Basically; ‘Let’s let emotion, feeling, religion, and nationalism guide our research.’ A good fit with ID really.


heh

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,15:05   

Quote

DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.

This is obviously a straw man caricature, liberally soaked in oil of red herring and set ablaze with polarizing, divisive ad hominem. You and your fellow travellers, and others of your ilk, should be ashamed of yourself, DiEb.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,15:09   

Quote
193
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm
DiEb,

definitionitis is an old complaint and too often a disease of the hyperskeptic that makes a mountain out of a mole-hill.

In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.

In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion, e.g. for text strings. Since such strings can be used to describe a 3-d entity or a process etc, discussion on strings is WLOG.

Now, certain clusters of configs in the space of possibilities w [for omega the traditional symbol in stat thermo-d] may be observably and identifiably distinct e.g. by providing some structurally based function, such as the correctly assembled parts of a 6500 c3 fishing reel, my favourite case. Thus we have a cluster of states that are functional in some way and a vastly larger number of clumped or scattered states that will not function in any relevant way.

Of course the issue that relevant systems are self replicating is trotted out. the problem is we are looking at a cell-scale von Neuman kinematic self replicator, which is a further example of functionally specific complex orgtanisation and associated information that needs to be explained before it is allowed to drive all sorts of conclusions.

Yes, OOL must be solved first.

We then can ask ourselves, how do we get to such a cluster or island of function, a case e from a zone E within w.

If by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity, any reasonable assignment of probabilities of accessing cases c for a complex case such that c is in E, will be rapidly negligibly different from zero.

Exponential explosion of possibilities as n bits have 2^n possible configs. More complex cases can be reduced to bits.

This of course runs into challenges of numerically or algebraically defining probabilities and defining functional targets.

There is an answer: search challenge.

Long since put here at UD and elsewhere.

Once the space w is for at least 500 – 1,000 bits, we are looking at 3.27*10^150 – 1.07*10^301 possibilities.

The atomic resources and atomic interaction rates for the 10^57 atoms of the sol system for the low end and the 10^80 for the observed cosmos at the high end, are such that the fraction of selected possibilities c from w is negligibly different from 0.

So, it is maximally implausible to reach any reasonably isolated island of function in the space by blind search.

Plausibility fail, backed up by utter want of empirical observation.

And, search then is implied as sampling of subsets in config spaces relevant to our studies.

Here, as default, blindly by chance and mechanical necessity.

Try AA sequence space and codon space that targets it. We could try random bit strings for AUTOCAD, hoping to come up with a design for a reel, or we can try random ASCII text to get text from the corpus of literature in English or the like.

All these cases give the same result, for rather obvious reasons.

Likewise, we can then say oh we have some circumstance that searches are very effective as natural selection is held to be. Of course that is within islands of function, when we need to find the islands as the first problem, not incremental hill climbing within the island.

In any case as searches are effectively subsets, they come from the power set of the space and so are exponentially harder, space of size w has power set of size 2^w. Search for golden search is far worse than direct search per whatever atomic level interactions occur in sol system or observed cosmos.

Such cases of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information have just one well known causal source: intelligently directed configuration.

But the whole point is, after years and years you and others of like ilk still want to sweep that inconvenient fact off the board and so repeatedly rhetorically pretend we have not provided a serious answer.

It has been there, for decades.

KF

Quote

195
DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.


I can haz numbars?

:p  :D  :O

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,15:55   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,15:09)
Quote
193
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm
DiEb,

definitionitis is an old complaint and too often a disease of the hyperskeptic that makes a mountain out of a mole-hill.

In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.

In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion, e.g. for text strings. Since such strings can be used to describe a 3-d entity or a process etc, discussion on strings is WLOG.

Now, certain clusters of configs in the space of possibilities w [for omega the traditional symbol in stat thermo-d] may be observably and identifiably distinct e.g. by providing some structurally based function, such as the correctly assembled parts of a 6500 c3 fishing reel, my favourite case. Thus we have a cluster of states that are functional in some way and a vastly larger number of clumped or scattered states that will not function in any relevant way.

Of course the issue that relevant systems are self replicating is trotted out. the problem is we are looking at a cell-scale von Neuman kinematic self replicator, which is a further example of functionally specific complex orgtanisation and associated information that needs to be explained before it is allowed to drive all sorts of conclusions.

Yes, OOL must be solved first.

We then can ask ourselves, how do we get to such a cluster or island of function, a case e from a zone E within w.

If by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity, any reasonable assignment of probabilities of accessing cases c for a complex case such that c is in E, will be rapidly negligibly different from zero.

Exponential explosion of possibilities as n bits have 2^n possible configs. More complex cases can be reduced to bits.

This of course runs into challenges of numerically or algebraically defining probabilities and defining functional targets.

There is an answer: search challenge.

Long since put here at UD and elsewhere.

Once the space w is for at least 500 – 1,000 bits, we are looking at 3.27*10^150 – 1.07*10^301 possibilities.

The atomic resources and atomic interaction rates for the 10^57 atoms of the sol system for the low end and the 10^80 for the observed cosmos at the high end, are such that the fraction of selected possibilities c from w is negligibly different from 0.

So, it is maximally implausible to reach any reasonably isolated island of function in the space by blind search.

Plausibility fail, backed up by utter want of empirical observation.

And, search then is implied as sampling of subsets in config spaces relevant to our studies.

Here, as default, blindly by chance and mechanical necessity.

Try AA sequence space and codon space that targets it. We could try random bit strings for AUTOCAD, hoping to come up with a design for a reel, or we can try random ASCII text to get text from the corpus of literature in English or the like.

All these cases give the same result, for rather obvious reasons.

Likewise, we can then say oh we have some circumstance that searches are very effective as natural selection is held to be. Of course that is within islands of function, when we need to find the islands as the first problem, not incremental hill climbing within the island.

In any case as searches are effectively subsets, they come from the power set of the space and so are exponentially harder, space of size w has power set of size 2^w. Search for golden search is far worse than direct search per whatever atomic level interactions occur in sol system or observed cosmos.

Such cases of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information have just one well known causal source: intelligently directed configuration.

But the whole point is, after years and years you and others of like ilk still want to sweep that inconvenient fact off the board and so repeatedly rhetorically pretend we have not provided a serious answer.

It has been there, for decades.

KF

Quote

195
DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.


I can haz numbars?

:p  :D  :O

Quote
203
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 3:30 pm
ET, I am positively trembling with fear of how my utter lack of intelligence, knowledge and ability to add up 2 and 3 have been exposed before the watching penumbra of animus sites. KF

From the ‘I know you are but what am I’ school of debate.

  
JohnW



Posts: 3015
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,16:41   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Jan. 22 2018,13:55)
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,15:09)
Quote
193
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm
DiEb,

definitionitis is an old complaint and too often a disease of the hyperskeptic that makes a mountain out of a mole-hill.

In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.

In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion, e.g. for text strings. Since such strings can be used to describe a 3-d entity or a process etc, discussion on strings is WLOG.

Now, certain clusters of configs in the space of possibilities w [for omega the traditional symbol in stat thermo-d] may be observably and identifiably distinct e.g. by providing some structurally based function, such as the correctly assembled parts of a 6500 c3 fishing reel, my favourite case. Thus we have a cluster of states that are functional in some way and a vastly larger number of clumped or scattered states that will not function in any relevant way.

Of course the issue that relevant systems are self replicating is trotted out. the problem is we are looking at a cell-scale von Neuman kinematic self replicator, which is a further example of functionally specific complex orgtanisation and associated information that needs to be explained before it is allowed to drive all sorts of conclusions.

Yes, OOL must be solved first.

We then can ask ourselves, how do we get to such a cluster or island of function, a case e from a zone E within w.

If by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity, any reasonable assignment of probabilities of accessing cases c for a complex case such that c is in E, will be rapidly negligibly different from zero.

Exponential explosion of possibilities as n bits have 2^n possible configs. More complex cases can be reduced to bits.

This of course runs into challenges of numerically or algebraically defining probabilities and defining functional targets.

There is an answer: search challenge.

Long since put here at UD and elsewhere.

Once the space w is for at least 500 – 1,000 bits, we are looking at 3.27*10^150 – 1.07*10^301 possibilities.

The atomic resources and atomic interaction rates for the 10^57 atoms of the sol system for the low end and the 10^80 for the observed cosmos at the high end, are such that the fraction of selected possibilities c from w is negligibly different from 0.

So, it is maximally implausible to reach any reasonably isolated island of function in the space by blind search.

Plausibility fail, backed up by utter want of empirical observation.

And, search then is implied as sampling of subsets in config spaces relevant to our studies.

Here, as default, blindly by chance and mechanical necessity.

Try AA sequence space and codon space that targets it. We could try random bit strings for AUTOCAD, hoping to come up with a design for a reel, or we can try random ASCII text to get text from the corpus of literature in English or the like.

All these cases give the same result, for rather obvious reasons.

Likewise, we can then say oh we have some circumstance that searches are very effective as natural selection is held to be. Of course that is within islands of function, when we need to find the islands as the first problem, not incremental hill climbing within the island.

In any case as searches are effectively subsets, they come from the power set of the space and so are exponentially harder, space of size w has power set of size 2^w. Search for golden search is far worse than direct search per whatever atomic level interactions occur in sol system or observed cosmos.

Such cases of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information have just one well known causal source: intelligently directed configuration.

But the whole point is, after years and years you and others of like ilk still want to sweep that inconvenient fact off the board and so repeatedly rhetorically pretend we have not provided a serious answer.

It has been there, for decades.

KF

 
Quote

195
DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.


I can haz numbars?

:p  :D  :O

Quote
203
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 3:30 pm
ET, I am positively trembling with fear of how my utter lack of intelligence, knowledge and ability to add up 2 and 3 have been exposed before the watching penumbra of animus sites. KF

From the ‘I know you are but what am I’ school of debate.

The Condensed KF:

1.  Here's a fishing reel.
2.  It looks really complicated.
3.  It was designed.
4.  Here's something biological.
5.  It looks even more complicated than the fishing reel.
6.  Therefore it was designed.
7.  In the event of awkward questions, start whining about ad hominem, red herrings, straw men....
8.  If that doesn't work, bang on about abortion, atheists, Muslims...
9.  If all else fails, Lewontin!

I've yet to see anything from Gordon which can't replaced by one, some or all of these steps.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,17:04   

Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 22 2018,16:41)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Jan. 22 2018,13:55)
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,15:09)
 
Quote
193
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm
DiEb,

definitionitis is an old complaint and too often a disease of the hyperskeptic that makes a mountain out of a mole-hill.

In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.

In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion, e.g. for text strings. Since such strings can be used to describe a 3-d entity or a process etc, discussion on strings is WLOG.

Now, certain clusters of configs in the space of possibilities w [for omega the traditional symbol in stat thermo-d] may be observably and identifiably distinct e.g. by providing some structurally based function, such as the correctly assembled parts of a 6500 c3 fishing reel, my favourite case. Thus we have a cluster of states that are functional in some way and a vastly larger number of clumped or scattered states that will not function in any relevant way.

Of course the issue that relevant systems are self replicating is trotted out. the problem is we are looking at a cell-scale von Neuman kinematic self replicator, which is a further example of functionally specific complex orgtanisation and associated information that needs to be explained before it is allowed to drive all sorts of conclusions.

Yes, OOL must be solved first.

We then can ask ourselves, how do we get to such a cluster or island of function, a case e from a zone E within w.

If by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity, any reasonable assignment of probabilities of accessing cases c for a complex case such that c is in E, will be rapidly negligibly different from zero.

Exponential explosion of possibilities as n bits have 2^n possible configs. More complex cases can be reduced to bits.

This of course runs into challenges of numerically or algebraically defining probabilities and defining functional targets.

There is an answer: search challenge.

Long since put here at UD and elsewhere.

Once the space w is for at least 500 – 1,000 bits, we are looking at 3.27*10^150 – 1.07*10^301 possibilities.

The atomic resources and atomic interaction rates for the 10^57 atoms of the sol system for the low end and the 10^80 for the observed cosmos at the high end, are such that the fraction of selected possibilities c from w is negligibly different from 0.

So, it is maximally implausible to reach any reasonably isolated island of function in the space by blind search.

Plausibility fail, backed up by utter want of empirical observation.

And, search then is implied as sampling of subsets in config spaces relevant to our studies.

Here, as default, blindly by chance and mechanical necessity.

Try AA sequence space and codon space that targets it. We could try random bit strings for AUTOCAD, hoping to come up with a design for a reel, or we can try random ASCII text to get text from the corpus of literature in English or the like.

All these cases give the same result, for rather obvious reasons.

Likewise, we can then say oh we have some circumstance that searches are very effective as natural selection is held to be. Of course that is within islands of function, when we need to find the islands as the first problem, not incremental hill climbing within the island.

In any case as searches are effectively subsets, they come from the power set of the space and so are exponentially harder, space of size w has power set of size 2^w. Search for golden search is far worse than direct search per whatever atomic level interactions occur in sol system or observed cosmos.

Such cases of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information have just one well known causal source: intelligently directed configuration.

But the whole point is, after years and years you and others of like ilk still want to sweep that inconvenient fact off the board and so repeatedly rhetorically pretend we have not provided a serious answer.

It has been there, for decades.

KF

 
Quote

195
DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.


I can haz numbars?

:p  :D  :O

 
Quote
203
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 3:30 pm
ET, I am positively trembling with fear of how my utter lack of intelligence, knowledge and ability to add up 2 and 3 have been exposed before the watching penumbra of animus sites. KF

From the ‘I know you are but what am I’ school of debate.

The Condensed KF:

1.  Here's a fishing reel.
2.  It looks really complicated.
3.  It was designed.
4.  Here's something biological.
5.  It looks even more complicated than the fishing reel.
6.  Therefore it was designed.
7.  In the event of awkward questions, start whining about ad hominem, red herrings, straw men....
8.  If that doesn't work, bang on about abortion, atheists, Muslims...
9.  If all else fails, Lewontin!

I've yet to see anything from Gordon which can't replaced by one, some or all of these steps.

10. Run to Barry and complain that someone has asked a question that is hard. Buried his nose in Barry’s rectal sphincter and begged for a bannination.

  
Lethean



Posts: 172
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,17:57   

Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 22 2018,16:41)
     
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Jan. 22 2018,13:55)
     
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,15:09)
       
Quote
193
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm
DiEb,

definitionitis is an old complaint and too often a disease of the hyperskeptic that makes a mountain out of a mole-hill.

In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.

In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion, e.g. for text strings. Since such strings can be used to describe a 3-d entity or a process etc, discussion on strings is WLOG.

Now, certain clusters of configs in the space of possibilities w [for omega the traditional symbol in stat thermo-d] may be observably and identifiably distinct e.g. by providing some structurally based function, such as the correctly assembled parts of a 6500 c3 fishing reel, my favourite case. Thus we have a cluster of states that are functional in some way and a vastly larger number of clumped or scattered states that will not function in any relevant way.

Of course the issue that relevant systems are self replicating is trotted out. the problem is we are looking at a cell-scale von Neuman kinematic self replicator, which is a further example of functionally specific complex orgtanisation and associated information that needs to be explained before it is allowed to drive all sorts of conclusions.

Yes, OOL must be solved first.

We then can ask ourselves, how do we get to such a cluster or island of function, a case e from a zone E within w.

If by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity, any reasonable assignment of probabilities of accessing cases c for a complex case such that c is in E, will be rapidly negligibly different from zero.

Exponential explosion of possibilities as n bits have 2^n possible configs. More complex cases can be reduced to bits.

This of course runs into challenges of numerically or algebraically defining probabilities and defining functional targets.

There is an answer: search challenge.

Long since put here at UD and elsewhere.

Once the space w is for at least 500 – 1,000 bits, we are looking at 3.27*10^150 – 1.07*10^301 possibilities.

The atomic resources and atomic interaction rates for the 10^57 atoms of the sol system for the low end and the 10^80 for the observed cosmos at the high end, are such that the fraction of selected possibilities c from w is negligibly different from 0.

So, it is maximally implausible to reach any reasonably isolated island of function in the space by blind search.

Plausibility fail, backed up by utter want of empirical observation.

And, search then is implied as sampling of subsets in config spaces relevant to our studies.

Here, as default, blindly by chance and mechanical necessity.

Try AA sequence space and codon space that targets it. We could try random bit strings for AUTOCAD, hoping to come up with a design for a reel, or we can try random ASCII text to get text from the corpus of literature in English or the like.

All these cases give the same result, for rather obvious reasons.

Likewise, we can then say oh we have some circumstance that searches are very effective as natural selection is held to be. Of course that is within islands of function, when we need to find the islands as the first problem, not incremental hill climbing within the island.

In any case as searches are effectively subsets, they come from the power set of the space and so are exponentially harder, space of size w has power set of size 2^w. Search for golden search is far worse than direct search per whatever atomic level interactions occur in sol system or observed cosmos.

Such cases of functionally specific complex organisation and associated information have just one well known causal source: intelligently directed configuration.

But the whole point is, after years and years you and others of like ilk still want to sweep that inconvenient fact off the board and so repeatedly rhetorically pretend we have not provided a serious answer.

It has been there, for decades.

KF

       
Quote

195
DiEb January 22, 2018 at 2:31 pm
KF, you obviously have no idea how modern mathematics work.


I can haz numbars?

:p  :D  :O

       
Quote
203
kairosfocus January 22, 2018 at 3:30 pm
ET, I am positively trembling with fear of how my utter lack of intelligence, knowledge and ability to add up 2 and 3 have been exposed before the watching penumbra of animus sites. KF

From the ‘I know you are but what am I’ school of debate.

The Condensed KF:

1.  Here's a fishing reel.
2.  It looks really complicated.
3.  It was designed.
4.  Here's something biological.
5.  It looks even more complicated than the fishing reel.
6.  Therefore it was designed.
7.  In the event of awkward questions, start whining about ad hominem, red herrings, straw men....
8.  If that doesn't work, bang on about abortion, atheists, Muslims...
9.  If all else fails, Lewontin!

I've yet to see anything from Gordon which can't replaced by one, some or all of these steps.



TL;DR-ing it even further it's quite literally

     
Quote
In the context, we have dealt with configuration spaces, which can be regarded as phase spaces in which momentum issues are not material.


the junkyard

     
Quote
In such spaces, we can see complexity through combinatorial explosion


the 747

     
Quote
Plausibility fail


What remains is the rectally extracted "mathy" window dressing of incredulity regarding the alleged tornado.

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2018,23:07   

Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 17 2017,10:05)
For those who remember me, I have my first ID blog post in a decade. It feels so 2007.

Now if only Hughes, Lenny Flank and Kristine would stop by to flame me the nostalgia would make my spleen burst.

Hey David, how's it going?

   
dheddle



Posts: 543
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2018,10:12   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2018,23:07)
Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 17 2017,10:05)
For those who remember me, I have my first ID blog post in a decade. It feels so 2007.

Now if only Hughes, Lenny Flank and Kristine would stop by to flame me the nostalgia would make my spleen burst.

Hey David, how's it going?

All good Steve. How are you?

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,12:50   

not bad. Though life's been harder since Nov 2016. Been fighting to get back on the wagon since then.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,13:01   

Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,13:42   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 24 2018,13:01)
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

Time for rethinking origins across the board!

KF, the author, at comment 5 is back to the old fallacy of argument from authority with Lewontin (never mind that he's never gotten it right, not that Lewontin's piece is very clear or much good in the first place (that he didn't like Sagan seems to the main point)).

I'd settle for IDists finally thinking. Rethinking can't take place before that.

Glen Davidson

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

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

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,14:29   

Quote
6
daveSJanuary 24, 2018 at 2:13 pm
KF,
Quote

Can we therefore agree that:

Sounds reasonable.

Would you agree that we have to assume that we actually are able to obtain information about the real world by conducting experiments? And therefore we must assume that, at least some of the time, demons are not interfering with our lab equipment (not to mention our minds)?


stop making me use tinyurl you IDiots.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,15:14   

if UD had been rolling like it was shortly after its founding, in 2005, it would have made sense to spend a few hours working out javascript to give some helpful buttons copying, pasting, formatting their nonsense. But now it's just a waste.

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2018,19:11   

Dionisio continues to use a UD thread as his personal repository for nonsense. I would love to see him try this on one of Mullings’ threads.
Mind numbing bullshit

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1065
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,02:37   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2018,06:01)
   
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

They really can't help themselves. To me, that headline is actually quite promising: perhaps, after all these years of ID generally and UD specifically getting nowhere and and persuading no one (other  than themselves) that they have a convincing case, KF is going to propose a new approach.

But no, instead we get a wall of copied and pasted text, quotes and diagrams that he has has posted dozens and dozens of time before. The regular commenters don’t really get it either: Trib7, ET, FourFaces and others all just complain about Darwinism (translated as evolutionism in ET’s case of course), or reference scripture in the same ineffectual way they have done for over a decade.

--------------
We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.”
-PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2254
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,07:49   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 25 2018,02:37)
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2018,06:01)
   
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

They really can't help themselves. To me, that headline is actually quite promising: perhaps, after all these years of ID generally and UD specifically getting nowhere and and persuading no one (other  than themselves) that they have a convincing case, KF is going to propose a new approach.

But no, instead we get a wall of copied and pasted text, quotes and diagrams that he has has posted dozens and dozens of time before. The regular commenters don’t really get it either: Trib7, ET, FourFaces and others all just complain about Darwinism (translated as evolutionism in ET’s case of course), or reference scripture in the same ineffectual way they have done for over a decade.

And kf shows further leadership: Re, Seversky: “a lot of this reads like complaining because science isn’t coming up with observations and theories that you like . . . “

I'm not sure that's what good leadership looks like,

--------------
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)

   
k.e..



Posts: 4523
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,07:49   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 25 2018,10:37)
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2018,06:01)
   
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

They really can't help themselves. To me, that headline is actually quite promising: perhaps, after all these years of ID generally and UD specifically getting nowhere and and persuading no one (other  than themselves) that they have a convincing case, KF is going to propose a new approach.

But no, instead we get a wall of copied and pasted text, quotes and diagrams that he has has posted dozens and dozens of time before. The regular commenters don’t really get it either: Trib7, ET, FourFaces and others all just complain about Darwinism (translated as evolutionism in ET’s case of course), or reference scripture in the same ineffectual way they have done for over a decade.

So after all their pleading and hand wringing, prayer is proven completely and utterly useless again. TFSM must be well and truly sick of their teeth nashing  and endless navel gazing.

I love the smell of burning fundies in the morning.

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

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1598
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,08:44   

Quote (k.e.. @ Jan. 25 2018,07:49)
Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 25 2018,10:37)
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2018,06:01)
     
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

They really can't help themselves. To me, that headline is actually quite promising: perhaps, after all these years of ID generally and UD specifically getting nowhere and and persuading no one (other  than themselves) that they have a convincing case, KF is going to propose a new approach.

But no, instead we get a wall of copied and pasted text, quotes and diagrams that he has has posted dozens and dozens of time before. The regular commenters don’t really get it either: Trib7, ET, FourFaces and others all just complain about Darwinism (translated as evolutionism in ET’s case of course), or reference scripture in the same ineffectual way they have done for over a decade.

So after all their pleading and hand wringing, prayer is proven completely and utterly useless again. TFSM must be well and truly sick of their teeth nashing  and endless navel gazing.

I love the smell of burning fundies in the morning.

Don't forget that KF doesn't worry about the penumbra of animus sites (like this one), in spite of the fact that he checks it out all the time.

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 2603
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,09:48   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 25 2018,02:37)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2018,06:01)
     
Quote
It is time for ID to provide real leadership in rethinking origins across the board
January 24, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Atheism, Back to Basics of ID, Fine tuning, governance, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc
5 Comments


leadership? All you idiots do is post on a dwindling number of blogs.

They really can't help themselves. To me, that headline is actually quite promising: perhaps, after all these years of ID generally and UD specifically getting nowhere and and persuading no one (other  than themselves) that they have a convincing case, KF is going to propose a new approach.

But no, instead we get a wall of copied and pasted text, quotes and diagrams that he has has posted dozens and dozens of time before. The regular commenters don’t really get it either: Trib7, ET, FourFaces and others all just complain about Darwinism (translated as evolutionism in ET’s case of course), or reference scripture in the same ineffectual way they have done for over a decade.

KF must be really agitated this time.  He forgot the fishing reel.  :O

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
stevestory



Posts: 10836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2018,10:05   

Quote
Re, Seversky: “a lot of this reads like complaining because science isn’t coming up with observations and theories that you like . . . “
January 25, 2018 Posted by kairosfocus under agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games, Back to Basics of ID, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, Intellectual freedom, Media Manipulation, Agit-Prop &/or Lawfare, Politics/policy and origins issues, Selective Hyperskepticism, warrant, knowledge, science and belief, You're a Nazi/fascist/racist/fundy/creationist etc

   
  10164 replies since Dec. 29 2013,11:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (339) < ... 311 312 313 314 315 [316] 317 318 319 320 321 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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