Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Design inference

Type
post
Date
August 22, 2011
Categorized
Design inference, Intelligent Design

Critics agree with Dembski, the No Free Lunch theorem applies to evolution

August 22, 2011
Design inference, Intelligent Design
Biologists in particular and scientists in general are horribly confused defenders of their field. When responding to attacks from non-scientists, rather than attempt the rigor that the geometry of induction and similar bodies of statistics provide, they fall back on Popperian incantations, trying to browbeat their opponents into acceding to the homily that if one follows certain magic rituals---the vaunted "scientific method"---then one is rewarded with The Truth. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
August 20, 2011
Categorized
Design inference, Intelligent Design, News

Beavers illustrate complex specified information, they don’t author it.

Denyse O'Leary
August 20, 2011
Design inference, Intelligent Design, News
Would beavers be better off if they could handle abstraction? Well, a leading cause of death in beavers is getting hit by a tree they felled. This cause of death is preventable - but mainly by developing theories about treefall - that is, abstraction. Which they can't do. Read More ›
Type
post
Author
Denyse O'Leary
Date
August 9, 2011
Categorized
Design inference

Texas Lottery revisited – why the Lottery can’t afford to highlight a design inference

Denyse O'Leary
August 9, 2011
Design inference
The Commission claimed lucky stars instead of vowing to catch cheats. Okay: We know it's not lucky stars. They're not claiming the customer cheated either. BUT, had the customer spied or otherwise interfered with the process, they could certainly have claimed that, and laid charges. So ... the logical inference is that they had a code and she broke it. Not? Read More ›