What Klymkowsky takes to be demonstrable fact is mostly a series of naturalist statements of belief in the first paragraph and flatly contradicted by mathematical facts in the second.
No wonder people don’t want this stuff in the schools.
ID Foundations
Foundational concepts and evidence for inferring design in light of empirically tested, reliable, observable signs
ID Breakthrough — Syn61 marks a live case of intelligent design of a life form
Let’s read the Nature abstract: Nature (2019) Article | Published: 15 May 2019 Total synthesis of Escherichia coli with a recoded genome Julius Fredens, Kaihang Wang, Daniel de la Torre, Louise F. H. Funke, Wesley E. Robertson, Yonka Christova, Tiongsun Chia, Wolfgang H. Schmied, Daniel L. Dunkelmann, Václav Beránek, Chayasith Uttamapinant, Andres Gonzalez Llamazares, Thomas Read More…
Abandon statistical significance, learn to live with uncertainty, scientists demand
Let’s see where this goes. Will it lead to less magic with numbers or more and bigger magic?
UD’s Weak Arguments Correctives page passes 50,000 visits
As I checked the dashboard, I just saw that the current visit-count for the “Frequently raised but weak arguments against Intelligent Design” page stands at 50,307. Worth noting, even as onlookers are again invited to ponder its remarks. END PS: Table of contents: WEAK ANTI-ID ARGUMENTS: 1] ID is “not science” 2] No Real Scientists Read More…
Answering DiEb: Just what is “search” in a sense relevant to ID?
For some time now, objector DiEb has been raising the question, what do we mean by speaking of “search” in the context of evolutionary search. At 311 in the parody thread, she [IIRC] remarks: >>Search is a central term in the work of Dr. Dr. William Dembski jr, Dr. Winston Ewert, and Dr. Robert Marks Read More…
Guest Post — Template-Assisted Ligation: A New OOL Model
Dr E. Selensky occasionally requests that UD posts an article on his behalf. What follows is his latest: ______________ Arguably, the RNA world model is excessively complex: it operates too complex structures and involves too complex interactions. The origin of life, some researchers believe, must have been simpler.In an attempt to close the gap between Read More…
What is “information”?
Information, of course, is notoriously a concept that has many senses of meaning. As it is central to the design inference, let us look (again) at defining it. We can dispose of one sense right off, Shannon was not directly interested in information but in information-carrying capacity; that is why his metric will peak for Read More…
Upright Biped’s summary on information systems in cell based life
UD participant Upright Biped (of Complexity Cafe U/D: Biosemiosis) has commented recently in the what is knowledge thread, replying to frequent objector CR by summarising key aspects of the role of information systems in observed cell based life. His remarks are well worth headlining: __________________ UB, 195: >>We can start by summarizing the core physical Read More…
UD Guest Post: Dr Eugen S on the second law of thermodynamics (plus . . . ) vs. “evolution”
Our Physicist and Computer Scientist from Russia — and each element of that balance is very relevant — is back, with more. MOAR, in fact. This time, he tackles the “terror-fitted depths” of thermodynamics and biosemiotics. (NB: Those needing a backgrounder may find an old UD post here and a more recent one here, helpful.) Read More…
A Tutorial on Specified Complexity
I’ve found that a lot of people who are interested in Intelligent Design are nonetheless unaware of the mathematics behind it. Therefore, I decided to do some videos teaching the basic ideas.
BTB: Points to ponder as we look at Crick’s understanding of DNA as text, since March 19, 1953
A few days back, I headlined a clip from Crick’s letter to his son Michael, March 19, 1953: The main text is accessible here (with page scans). Sans diagrams: >>My Dear Michael, Jim Watson and I have probably made a most important discovery. We have built a model for the structure of des-oxy-ribose-nucleic-acid (read it Read More…
Fixing a Confusion
I have often noticed something of a confusion on one of the major points of the Intelligent Design movement – whether or not the design inference is primarily based on the failure of Darwinism and/or mechanism.
BTB, Q: Where does the FSCO/I concept come from? (Is it reasonable/ credible?)
A: One of the old sayings of WW II era bomber pilots was that flak gets heaviest over a sensitive target. So, when something as intuitively obvious and easily demonstrated as configuration-based, functionally specific complex organisation and/or associated (explicit or implicit) information — FSCO/I — becomes a focus for objections, that is an implicit sign Read More…
Back to Basics of ID: Induction, scientific reasoning and the design inference
In the current VJT thread on 31 scientists who did not follow methodological naturalism, it has been noteworthy that objectors have studiously avoided addressing the basic warrant for the design inference. Since this is absolutely pivotal but seems to be widely misunderstood or even dismissed without good reason, it seems useful to summarise this for Read More…
Full Vid: DI/Denton, privileged species
Here: [youtube VoI2ms5UHWg] Let us watch and ponder, then discuss. END Posts