|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
 Posted - 11/03/2004 : 19:01:48 [Permalink]
|
Oh no, has he left? I'm gone for two days and he simply quits. I was just gonna post a really good one. Heck, I'll do it anyway:
==========================================================================
My quote:
"******OK then, how does SLOT make ID falsifiable?*******"
JerryB quote:
"It doesn't. I fear we may be talking past one another on this issue. All I was trying to get across is that this is a tenet of ID and I would think it is probably unique to ID when it comes to origin studies. I then was attempting to show several
tenets of ID as falsifiable and I thought someone was asking me HOW I would falsify this one. Since this tenet is based on SLOT, the answer would be to falsify SLOT."
Note that you said that ID would be false if SLOT was false. But even if you falsified SLOT you would not falsify ID. The direction of entropy change in the universe has no bearing on the existence/non-existence of a designer. Ie, if entropy in the universe is increasing then there COULD be a designer, but if entropy in the universe is decreasing there COULD also be a designer. All you are really saying (for the second time in the above paragraph) is that ID does not violate SLOT.
JerryB quote:
"But the germane point is that it IS falsifiable."
I might have missed something, but the only falsifiable statements re ID you have presented are the following:
JerryB quote:
"...intelligent design does make several predictions:
1) With sexual reproduction over time, genomes will tend to become more disordered.
2) The building blocks of life, DNA and RNA will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
3) Complex homochiral proteins will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
4) Complex specified information will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
5) Irreducibly complex systems will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
6) Redundancy in organisms will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
7) Complex symbiotic systems will only be designed by an intelligent agent or preprogrammed code designed by an intelligent agent.
8) As genotypes become more disordered over time, phenotypes will as well."
I agree that these statements/predictions are falsifiable, but the only thing that can be falsified is the actual statements/predictions. They don't falsify ID. If we for example falsified #1 then ID would not be falsified since #2-#9 would still be valid. Even if all 9 were to be falsified, ID would still not be falsified, since you could always add #10 that states a falsifiable prediction that doesn't falsify ID.
Have you got any real hypotheses that can falsify ID?
==========================================================================
So, basically, all this probability stuff is irrelevant at least re the validity of ID.
|
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2004 : 19:49:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Ah, but we're talking about variation in the same basic genome, which has not increased in complexity such as mutated into producing new proteins.
No, but it contains more disorder, even without entirely new proteins.quote:
I just thought it up, but I didn't expect it to fly, since my stand is that entropy in evolution is a silly concept.
Actually, it's not. One can create a measure of almost anything, and call it entropy. "Population entropy," as we all learned pages ago, is a completely valid measurement of the diversity of a population. Shannon's "Information entropy" is a measure of the minimum bandwidth required to transmit a binary-coded information source without loss.
What's silly is Jerry's insistence that if something uses the term "entropy," whatever it's applied to is suddenly (and inexplicably) bound by the second law of thermodynamics. Population diversity is not based upon thermodynamics, and neither is information. For example, if we take the current human population of Earth, we'll find it has a high population entropy, as it is very diverse. But, decimate the population with a random asteroid strike, and the population entropy will suddenly drop. And as more people die from the event as time goes on but the plants all die, the population entropy will continue to decrease, until there's only one person left, at which point the population entropy will be zero (no diversity at all).quote:
Speculating on Jerry's statement earlier (if he could really make in fly), my thought on this was that all bad mutations causing lesser-fits that wind up forgotten in the grand scheme of things represents a general increase of entropy.
If Jerry could make it fly. One of the problems I saw in one of his debates was his inability to support the idea that detrimental mutations necessarily represent an increase in entropy, while beneficial mutations represent a decrease in entropy. The switches between thermodynamic entropy, population entropy, information entropy and configuration entropy came fast and furious, in one massive equivocation, instead.quote:
He got me so worked up about that stupid probability-stuff, and CSI (not the crime-lab), that missed that one. I assumed he meant two species, as you described.
He may have, but he's never said so. And his repetitions of the whole "ameobas to man" thing sure make it sound like he thinks the only commonality in "common descent" is at the root of the tree of life. But perhaps that's too verlch-like (with verlch's insistence that evolution means that every land vertebrate evolved from a different species of fish). Then again, Jerry does seem to think the old canard of "if man evolved from monkeys, why are monkeys still around?" is a valid critique of "Darwinism." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2004 : 14:03:34 [Permalink]
|
In case Jerry does return, I owe him at least this much:quote:
Originally posted by JerryB
There are no poofs in the methodology of ID. I have already posted that ID embraces the same quantum mechanics as does molecular design engineers. I posted the charts for you and you read 'em. The only poofs that exist here are in abiogenesis, I'm afraid.
It seems to me that you are simply refusing to try to understand what I said. If you're not going to make an attempt at understanding the views of your "opposition," little productive discourse will happen.quote:
You say some of the silliest things from time to time, Dave. Do you understand what a law of physics is? The laws of physics are universal:
And they are also based upon unprovable assumptions, like that the universe exists at all. Apparently you're unfamiliar with solipsism.quote:
So, where do you get this: "The point is that all sciences, maths and logics depend on unprovable assumtions." Back this up with some references, please, as it simply is not true.
It is true, due to the simple fact that you cannot design a test which can prove that you have not simply dreamt up your entire existence. Nor can you prove that I exist as an independent entity from you.quote:
Finally materialism is a belief--a philosophy--a religion in that it is based on faith where there is no evidence to support the belief:
Apparently, you're also unfamiliar with the philosophy of science. Science itself is just an epistemology.quote:
Materialist: "The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena."
Is there universal evidence to support this?
Of course not, but neither is there "universal evidence" to support anything about ID. The basic philosophies behind both materialism and ID are chock-full of inductions, which you claim to be invalid science.quote:
The poll says nothing like this that I posted, The figure 33% was never mentioned in it.
Tell me how "nearly a third" and "nearly 33%" differ in a quantitative way.quote:
Nearly a third is an estimate and not a statistical fact like a percentage.
Which is why I said "nearly 33%." Or do you think that the 10% figure in the same report is not an estimate, simply because it's expressed as a percentage. Unless the study sampled every college graduate, the percentages are necessarily estimates.quote:
Finally you are simply making up facts not stated in the survey: "33% also rejects the cosmological position that the universe has existed for 15 billion years." is not said anywhere in the text. You are trying to get us to swallow that a third of college graduates are YECs?
Indeed. The article said they believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis, which itself says the Earth is 6,000 years old and that the Earth was created before the Sun.quote:
Well where on earth were these guys hiding when I was in school?
Don't know what school you went to, so I have no idea.quote:
Did you enjoy getting to see a PhD level thermodynamicist secular humanist research scientist get his butt whipped by a dumb IDist in his own field?
After a month, you both were still arguing over definitions. Pixie was clearly frustrated by your inability to consistently speak about the same kind of entropy, and your lack of knowledge. There was no butt-whipping, Pixie left the field of battle in disgust, not in disgrace.quote:
In fact, I specifically support that concept by showing the exact degradation of the human genome and then calculating that degradation mathematically showing entropy increasing in the human genome rather than decreasing as complex macroevolution would require.
But, you leave out the rest of the entropy calculations, so your logic is baseless.quote:
I have repeatedly stated that SLOT is a tendency against complex change not just change. And if you thank that macroevolution is just a little bigger change than microevolution, you need to learn what the words mean. Macroevolution = speciation.
Sigh. You said that neither microevolution nor macroevolution violate SLOT. You've said that "complex macroevolution" (an even larger change than macroevolution) is what would violate SLOT, if it had happened. So, your reply here is simply a failure to answer my question.quote:
The question is largely nonsensical. For example, you will have to define systemic entropy and explain to me how you think it relates to genetics. May I get a link to that relationship so I can understand what you are asking?
I'm just running through what you've been saying. SLOT doesn't forbid increases in entropy in parts of a system, but it does in the whole. I submit that humans are only a part of the entropic system you're trying to measure, as speciation events create a larger system (and create entropy in the system).
On the other hand, it is up to you who claim that "complex macroevolution" would violate SLOT and so didn't happen to define what sort of entropy you're talking about. You haven't done so yet.quote:
But designers can simply separate the Ls from the Ds chem |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2004 : 18:59:56 [Permalink]
|
And now, as promised, here are Jerry's Unsupported Assertions.
I'll do the format a little different than last time, as I'm going to keep a separate list of Jerry's strawmen. But the first list will be assertions that Jerry has made or implied without supporting well (if at all). Note that some of these (and some in the second list) are re-worded for clarity.
Jerry may feel that he has supported some (or all) of these assertions, but it certainly isn't the case that he's supported them to the satisfaction of many people here. And scientific arguments can only move forward once everyone has agreed to the premises. Also, let me remind Jerry that he said, "I actually enjoy being challenged on my assertions as this is how I format my personal belief system."- ID is being "accepted in main-stream America."
- ID has not already gone "through the process to be shown wrong."
- There is a science of ID.
- "...it is the only credible explanation of origins out there."
- ID isn't religion.
- Jerry is not a religionist.
- "Today, ID is science without a sliver of theology anywhere in it..."
- ID "only detects design."
- ID has something to do with Tipler's Omega Point.
- "IDists of the modern type are scientists rather than creationists."
- "Physics supports ID in that thermodynamics totally 'disses' Darwinism and fully supports ID."
- "Biology supports ID in that genomes in sexual species tend to disorder rather than order."
- "Chemistry supports ID in that chemical equilibrium forbids racemic mixtures of amino acids from forming into levorotatory dominance."
- ID is "growing in leaps and bounds both with the public and with scientists."
- "ID predicts that objects will disorder."
- Very little has been written about ID.
- Most scientists do not know what ID is.
- There exists "an observer in this universe fully explained by science."
- The Discovery Institute represents "a small but quite vocal minority" of IDists.
- The fossil record supports ID.
- The "Omega Point" is only refuted if Tipler's math is refuted.
- "ID is science because it studies physics, biology and chemistry which is science."
- The repeated use of the word 'must' in Jerry's eight answers to "What in science supports ID?"
- Bacterial flagella are designed.
- ATP machines are designed.
- "...function is an intelligently assigned property..."
- Induction is not a part of science.
- The fossil record shows creatures "come into the record fully formed and ready to go in their environment."
- The fossil record supports "no other concept of origins."
- Dembski approaches ID from a philosophical perspective.
- Jerry approaches ID "purely scientifically."
- Sub-atomic particles have intelligence.
- CSI calculations are "done everyday somewhere."
- A tree "becomes ordered because a designer preprogrammed code that goes into a seed..."
- Jerry uses the same version of thermodynamics "taught at the universities."
- There isn't any evidence supporting the idea that the fossil record shows transitions between phyla.
- Because the only way to show that is through "breeding tests or DNA tests..."
- Genetic code is highly analogous to computer software.
- An article shows that the human genome is becoming more disordered over time.
- Configurational entropy is applicable to genetics.
- "Tons" of biology papers support ID (without mentioning it, apparently).
- "ID predicts that organisms originate fully formed and ready to go in their environment."
- Archeology, SETI, etc. all use design detection just like Jerry does.
- "Every biological process is not spontaneous, but speciations are."
- "Complex macroe
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 15:47:58 [Permalink]
|
Good work as usual Dave.
To continue this discussion, of only for a minute (and without, it seems, the chief antagonist), I saw in the latest Scientific American (November 2004), there is a discussion of Black Holes and information (an odd grouping, I know), whereing the authors note early on:
quote:
Every electron, photon and other elementary particle stores bits of data, and every time two such particles interact, those bits are transformed. Physical existence and information content are inextricably linked. As physicist John Wheeler of Princeton University says, "It from bit."
The article goes on (you need to subscribe, I think, to read the thing in full on-line), but one of the points is that there's loads of information in just small pieces of matter, which seems to go against Jerry's notion (following Dembsky?) that there's only a finite and not very large amount of information in the universe. I don't know if the SciAm article is relevant for the discussion of information in regards to ID, but I thought I'd throw it out for those more scientifically inclined... |
|
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 19:54:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by astropin
http://ydr.com/story/main/45864/
Picked up this story from a CSICOP email. Simply Freighting. People we are heading back into the dark ages. Or is it simply a new Dark Age? This is bad, really, really bad. This school needs to be sued into submission. Note: I am not normally a big "let's sue em'" kind of guy, but in cases like this....LET'S SUE EM' SO BAD THAT NO SCHOOL WILL EVER TRY THIS SHIT AGAIN....end of rant.
you guys are just a bunch of cry baby liberals. Are you having trouble taking Jesus out of the air waves? Lets Sue evolutions for teaching an unprovable theory! Fight fire with fire! |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 20:14:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
you guys are just a bunch of cry baby liberals. Are you having trouble taking Jesus out of the air waves? Lets Sue evolutions for teaching an unprovable theory! Fight fire with fire!
Last time it was tried, Fundie(TM) creationists LOST <-- read it and weep. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 21:01:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
you guys are just a bunch of cry baby liberals. Are you having trouble taking Jesus out of the air waves? Lets Sue evolutions for teaching an unprovable theory! Fight fire with fire!
Did the institution have a sort of vacation for its, uh, patients, or do they now have access to an internet connection? |
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 21:09:38 [Permalink]
|
After all the bits Verlch has expended on this forum to whine about his inability to cope with women who aren't doormats/slaves, the idea of hem/her/it calling anyone a crybaby is utterly laughable.
Isn't there something we can do about attracting a better class of troll to this joint? This one's too much like being stuck waiting for a bus on a corner occupied by a babbling urban street lunatic.
No sense, no entertainment value and the pity's wearing thin.  |
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 21:29:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ktesibios
This one's too much like being stuck waiting for a bus on a corner occupied by a babbling urban street lunatic.
lol! I laughed out loud at that one, truly a perfect analogy. He does remind me of some of the ones I've met.
However, I respectfully disagree on the "no entertainment value." I find Velch amusing, but purely as a spectacle to be observed. Any attempt at communication is an exercise in futility.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/10/2004 21:30:35 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2004 : 04:29:19 [Permalink]
|
Verlch, this Hit&Squall&Run tactic you are employing will profit you no more that your pervious, spouted-then-unsupported-then-forgotten assertions have.
Indeed, less. Before, we used to enjoy picking you're statments apart; currently, we just sneer at them. Are you now afraid that if you don't shout and buzz off quickly, you'll get swatted like a fly?
Hmmm?
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2004 : 05:58:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by astropin
LET'S SUE EM' SO BAD THAT NO SCHOOL WILL EVER TRY THIS SHIT AGAIN....end of rant.
I think this is the solution to this problem.
Hit em' were it hurts - their wallets.
Is it possible to sue the people responsible for this <bovine feces>?
Misusing a position (causing the school to face a certain lawsuit) of trust to advance your own agenda must be illegal.
|
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
|
|
|
Rubicon95
Skeptic Friend
USA
220 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2004 : 08:14:42 [Permalink]
|
It is not the school that did it. It's the school board.
Interesting to note. One of the Board Members homeschools his kids. So why is he on the board? Whether or not ID is taught it won't effect his kids.
Growing up I went to a Catholic High School. We were taught evolution in science and theology in religious studies. They weren't combined. We were left to make our own decisions.
From the website:
“Students will be made aware of gaps/problems in Darwin's Theory" -- OK I thought any science class would point out any hole, short comings, problems in any theory.
" and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design."
Other theories? So what other theories Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindi, Zoarastrian, Rastafarian, Jainist, Buddhist, Baalist, Apophist, Daniel Jackson's?
It just opens up a whole can of worms.
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2004 : 11:42:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
“Students will be made aware of gaps/problems in Darwin's Theory" -- OK I thought any science class would point out any hole, short comings, problems in any theory.
Rubicon, the issue is that evolution (the current understanding of it anyway) is solidly supported by multiple and independent branches of inquiry that it's an extremely well evidenced theory. Wanting to teach "alternatives" to evolution is akin to wanting to teach "alternative gravity theory".
Keep theology in the theology classroom. ID is NOT science, no matter how well the fundies try to dress it up as science. It's like a drag-queen.... all you have to do is look at the adam's apple to see the lie.
Those who push ID are nothing more than preachers with a creationist agenda.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2004 : 13:21:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
quote:
Originally posted by astropin
http://ydr.com/story/main/45864/
Picked up this story from a CSICOP email. Simply Freighting. People we are heading back into the dark ages. Or is it simply a new Dark Age? This is bad, really, really bad. This school needs to be sued into submission. Note: I am not normally a big "let's sue em'" kind of guy, but in cases like this....LET'S SUE EM' SO BAD THAT NO SCHOOL WILL EVER TRY THIS SHIT AGAIN....end of rant.
you guys are just a bunch of cry baby liberals.
Unsupported, several are economic conservatives. Some are social conservatives. Typical mudslinging from verlch's orifice o' lies/misrepresentations.
quote:
Are you having trouble taking Jesus out of the air waves?
Not being attempted. Any more cry-baby unsupported "poor persecuted Xtian" crap? I call it Xtian because you've taken the Christ out of it. (Thanks to mggm from the Delphi religion message board for that tidbit)
quote:
Lets Sue evolutions for teaching an unprovable theory! Fight fire with fire!
You do realize that the truth is a positive defense for such frivolous suits?
I'm all for ID being taught in school as part of a theological class, not a science one. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
