It seems we need to clarify language. For, we see in the Ortho types thread: EG, 140: >> . . . Definitions of language: Webster’s: the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community. Britannica: a system of conventional spoken, manual (signed), or written symbols by means of which human beings, as members of a social group and participants in its culture, express themselves. Cambridge: a system of communication consisting of sounds, words, and grammar, or the system of communication used by people in a particular country or type of work. Collins: A language is a system of communication which consists of a set of sounds and written symbols which are used by Read More ›

Every time we run a series of articles on the genetic code, our combox gets stuffed with comments from materialists claiming the idea that the genetic code is an actual code is fallacious, an error committed only by those ID rubes with an agenda. But, of course, not only is this untrue, it is easily shown to be untrue. There are numerous examples of materialists insisting that the “code” part of “genetic code” refers to a real code; it is not an analogy nor the sloppy use of language. To his credit Larry Moran is one such: The Real Genetic Code This is the genetic code. It shows the relationship between a sequence of nucleotides in messenger RNA (mRNA), or Read More ›

One of the more astonishing rhetorical gambits of objectors to the design inference is to try to suggest that the alphanumeric, code-using, algorithmic information system we see in the D/RNA of the living cell and linked protein synthesis is not really an information system, it all reduces to chemical reaction trains. A common associated gambit is to assert that terms like “code” etc are all readily dismissible analogies. As a first reminder, protein synthesis as graphically summarised: Of course, it never hurts to remind such objectors of p. 5 of Sir Francis Crick’s $6 million, March 19, 1953 letter to his son, Michael: Notice, his belief right from the outset of discovering the double-helix stricture: “. . . D.N.A. is Read More ›

Did you ever notice how materialists like to have it both ways on the probable exist of other intelligences?  Consider a recent exchange between Kairosfocus and that fount of materialist hypocrisy Ed George in the context of a discussion of the semiotic code instantiated in every living cell: KF:  It is noteworthy that algorithmic, alphanumeric code — a linguistic phenomenon — remains stubbornly as only the product of intelligence. EG:  [T]o the best of our knowledge, it remains stubbornly as only the product of human intelligence. Ed reasons as follows:  KF has no warrant to infer that the staggeringly complex, sophisticated and elegant genetic code – a semiotic code far beyond our present ability to replicate – is the product Read More ›

Astoundingly, even after my last post (Orthomyxo’s Hero May be the Worst Scientist of All Time), Orthomyxo continues to defend disgraced scientist Neil Ferguson and the debunked Imperial College Model (ICM) that touched off worldwide panic and the tragic waste of trillions of dollars. For further reading on the debunked model, the American Institute of Economic Research has issued: Imperial College Model Applied to Sweden Yields Preposterous Results. The article details two of the main flaws with the ICM — the inexcusable secrecy surrounding its source code and the “preposterous” predictions the model makes in the case of Sweden. The entire article is must reading. First — and I found this to be utterly astounding — is the total lack Read More ›