Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

When Darwinism infects popular culture, confusion follows as well as nonsense

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
File:Nostradamus prophecies.jpg

Every so often, one reads a sentence that just takes one’s breath away from an otherwise intelligent writer who uses Darwinism to help explain the world: This from Colin Dickey’s “Quack Prophet” (Lapham’s Quarterly):

Whether it’s the Dead Sea Scrolls or Finnegan’s Wake, there’s a long literary history of taking the garbled and the fragmented and looking for lucid meaning beneath. The science writer and professional skeptic Michael Shermer has gone so far as to argue that we’re hard-wired, from an evolutionary perspective, to look for such hidden meanings. “From sensory data flowing in through the senses the brain naturally begins to look for and find patterns, and then infuses those patterns with meaning,” Shermer writes. “We can’t help it. Our brains evolved to connect the dots of our world.” By adjusting the signal-to-noise ratio, Nostradamus introduced enough static into his Prophecies that they could be all things to all readers, poetic Rorschach blots of detail and blur.

Excuse us, but: The Dead Sea Scrolls are a remarkable 1947 find (since augmented) of a group of manuscript fragments and artifacts that everyone knew had lucid meaning, but awaited translation and clarification. You didn’t need to be “hard-wired” to notice any of that. Finnegan’s Wake is a deliberately obscure novel written by Irish novelist James Joyce, pored over by generations of academic dullards – to Joyce’s huge amusement, had he lived to see that entire circus play out. Much of it probably did have some meaning; it was written in English by an already successful novelist. Again, no “hardwiring” required to suppose that, though a certain amount of denseness for spending a lot of time on the problem.

It’s not like seeing patterns in the clouds, which might actually be evidence for Shermer’s thesis if not pressed too far – which it nearly always is.

Conflating the Scrolls and Finnegan’s Wake, spiced up with some Shermerite nonsense about how our brains evolved to … whatever, is an appalling but telling example of cultural Darwinism at work.

Those who don’t believe in meaning corrupt and confound it.

Note: The ostensible subject of the piece is that reliable checkout counter tabloid icon, the “prophet” Nostradamus, who was obscure for an entirely unrelated reason – to avoid falsification. Reminds one of something, no … ?

Comments
And in case it helps, here is an example of a DNA sequence containing five codons: AUGCCGACAGUAGAG here is a variant: AUGCCGACAGUAGUG Which you might conceivably call a change of "state" of the position marked in bold. But what about this variant: AUGCCGACAGUAGUAGAG What has changed state, if anything? or in this variant: AUGCCGACAGAG? This is why DNA cannot be usefully described as a "base 4 digital" system - it has nothing in common with a "base 4 digital" system, although it has plenty in common with a 4 letter alphabetic system in which sequences of "letters" have "meaning". It could also be usefully described as a "base 2 digital system" because genes can be in one of two states: Off, and On, and indeed switching one gene Off can turn another one Off or On in a logical cascade in which certain inputs result in certain outputs. But Base 4 digital it ain't.Elizabeth Liddle
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
05:12 AM
5
05
12
AM
PDT
It's too bad that so many materialists/darwinists skip over BA77's posts (or at least say they do), because he does an excellent job of refuting (with references and abundant resources) materialism and darwinism at the most fundamental level. Materialism and determinism have been effectively disproven for decades, yet darwinists and materialists still argue as if their basic, foundational concepts are still valid. Arguing evolution with a materialist is like arguing orbital satellite telemetry with a flat-earther.William J Murray
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:59 AM
4
04
59
AM
PDT
The reason I refuse to take "correction", kf, is simply that I do not believe I am incorrect. Tell me how a base pair can take one of four states, as it has to do if it is to be regarded as a "digit" in a "base 4 digital code". I quite agree that DNA sequences can be described as "three letter words". That was my point; that it is an alphabetic system not a "base 4 digital" system. And will you please walk back your insinuation that I am refusing to accept that DNA is a "base 4 digital" system because of its alleged implications for ID; it is self-evidently false, as evidenced by the fact that I have made it clear that I am quite happy to regard gene regulatory networks as digital, ergo, I have no problem with the idea that genetic processes are digital.Elizabeth Liddle
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:59 AM
4
04
59
AM
PDT
Dr Liddle Pardon, but that is simply dancing wrong but strong. Between the letters a and B, what are the defined states of the alphabet, again? None. Alphabetic writing uses standard glyphs to define states of string data structures, which take meaning from functional specificity per a defined vocabulary [code] and rules of composition. In other words, the alphabet-based message is a digital system. And, R/DNA is a case in point, using four basic letters [three bases, like AUG], and three-letter words to define instructions to elongate AA chains. Also, if you look at say Eukaryotes, you will see that mRNA is nipped up and reassembled to form the actual code to be processed in the ribosome. The intensity of refusal to take correction on the point, is telling. You cannot even acknowledge the base-4 system being used, something as easily accessible as Wikipedia. In the section on the expanded code, we may see:
Since 2001, 40 non-natural amino acids have been added into protein by creating a unique codon (recoding) and a corresponding transfer-RNA:aminoacyl – tRNA-synthetase pair to encode it with diverse physicochemical and biological properties in order to be used as a tool to exploring protein structure and function or to create novel or enhanced proteins.[36][37] H. Murakami and M. Sisido have extended some codons to have four and five bases. Steven A. Benner constructed a functional 65th (in vivo) codon.[38]
As in, an empirically demonstrated, reprogrammable digital system. Please, think again. GEM of TKI PS: I am still seeing that "anonymous" in the preview window.kairosfocus
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:51 AM
4
04
51
AM
PDT
From your link:
The page you've been trying to access was blocked to prevent access to malicious web content which may attack your computer
ba77: DNA computing does not treat DNA as a "base 4 digital system". Which is just as well, because DNA is not a "base 4 digital system". The units in DNA computing are molecules (not base-pairs) that catalyze reactions, sometimes called "DNAzymes". non-malicious wiki linkElizabeth Liddle
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:34 AM
4
04
34
AM
PDT
DNA Computer Excerpt: DNA computers will work through the use of DNA-based logic gates. These logic gates are very much similar to what is used in our computers today with the only difference being the composition of the input and output signals.,,, With the use of DNA logic gates, a DNA computer the size of a teardrop will be more powerful than today’s most powerful supercomputer. A DNA chip less than the size of a dime will have the capacity to perform 10 trillion parallel calculations at one time as well as hold ten terabytes of data. The capacity to perform parallel calculations, much more trillions of parallel calculations, is something silicon-based computers are not able to do. As such, a complex mathematical problem that could take silicon-based computers thousands of years to solve can be done by DNA computers in hours. http://www.tech-faq.com/dna-computer.htmlbornagain77
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:21 AM
4
04
21
AM
PDT
So strong is this that we see objectors trying to tell us that the digital information in DNA is not digital information [e.g. I found the reference to its being alphabetic instead particularly astonishingly ill-informed]
And yet you offered no rebuttal to my reasoning, and ignored the fact that I was perfectly willing to accept as "digital" the switching mechanisms that control gene expression. In other words, I clearly have no problem with the idea that genes work "digitally", yet you continue to assert that my case that DNA is not "base 4 digital code" is some kind of smokescreen to deny that there is anything digital about DNA lest I allow a Divine Foot in the door. DNA is not "base 4 digital code" because base (in the other sense) pairs are not entities that are switched between four possible states. If you disagree, please post your rebuttal. Simply describing it as "particularly astonishingly ill-informed", and, moreoever, ascribing it to a desire on my pair to deny that cells are digital for fear of its ID implications, is what you might call an "ad hominem-laced straw man" ;)Elizabeth Liddle
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
04:13 AM
4
04
13
AM
PDT
And quantum teleporation has now shown that atoms, which are suppose to be the basis from which ALL functional information ‘emerges’ in the atheistic neo-Darwinian view of life, are now shown to be, in fact, reducible to the transcendent functional quantum information that the atoms were suppose to be the basis of in the first place!
Ions have been teleported successfully for the first time by two independent research groups Excerpt: In fact, copying isn’t quite the right word for it. In order to reproduce the quantum state of one atom in a second atom, the original has to be destroyed. This is unavoidable – it is enforced by the laws of quantum mechanics, which stipulate that you can’t ‘clone’ a quantum state. In principle, however, the ‘copy’ can be indistinguishable from the original (that was destroyed),,, http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/Issues/2004/October/beammeup.asp Atom takes a quantum leap – 2009 Excerpt: Ytterbium ions have been ‘teleported’ over a distance of a metre.,,, “What you’re moving is information, not the actual atoms,” says Chris Monroe, from the Joint Quantum Institute at the University of Maryland in College Park and an author of the paper. But as two particles of the same type differ only in their quantum states, the transfer of quantum information is equivalent to moving the first particle to the location of the second. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2171769/posts
Thus the burning question, that is usually completely ignored by the neo-Darwinists that I’ve asked in the past, is, “How can quantum information/entanglement possibly ‘emerge’ from any material basis of atoms in DNA, or any other atoms, when entire atoms are now shown to reduce to transcendent quantum information in the first place in these teleportation experiments??? i.e. It is simply COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE for the ’cause’ of transcendent functional quantum information, such as we find on a massive scale in DNA and proteins, to reside within, or ever ‘emerge’ from, any material basis of particles!!! Despite the virtual wall of silence I’ve seen from neo-Darwinists thus far, this is not a trivial matter in the least as far as developments in science have gone!!
Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – Stuart Hameroff - video (notes in description) http://vimeo.com/29895068
non-local ‘epigenetic’ information is implicated in controlling the 3-D spatial organization of body plans; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iNy78O6ZpU8wpFIgkILi85TvhC9mSqzUSE_jzbksoHY/edit?hl=en_US verses and music:
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 1 Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. Brooke Fraser – Lord of Lords(Legendado Português) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkF3iVjOZ1I
bornagain77
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:59 AM
3
03
59
AM
PDT
The necessity of 'transcendent' information, to ‘constrain’ a cell, against thermodynamic effects is noted here:
Information and entropy – top-down or bottom-up development in living systems? A.C. McINTOSH Excerpt: This paper highlights the distinctive and non-material nature of information and its relationship with matter, energy and natural forces. It is proposed in conclusion that it is the non-material information (transcendent to the matter and energy) that is actually itself constraining the local thermodynamics to be in ordered disequilibrium and with specified raised free energy levels necessary for the molecular and cellular machinery to operate. http://journals.witpress.com/paperinfo.asp?pid=420
i.e. It is very interesting to note, to put it mildly, that quantum entanglement, which conclusively demonstrates that ‘information’ in its pure ‘quantum form’ is completely transcendent of any time and space constraints, should be found in molecular biology on such a massive scale, for how can the quantum entanglement ‘effect’ in biology possibly be explained by a material (matter/energy space/time) ’cause’ when the quantum entanglement ‘effect’ falsified material particles as its own ‘causation’ in the first place? (A. Aspect) Appealing to the probability of various configurations of material particles, as neo-Darwinism does, simply will not help since a timeless/spaceless cause must be supplied which is beyond the capacity of the energy/matter particles themselves to supply! To give a coherent explanation for an effect that is shown to be completely independent of any time and space constraints one is forced to appeal to a cause that is itself not limited to time and space! i.e. Put more simply, you cannot explain a effect by a cause that has been falsified by the very same effect you are seeking to explain! Improbability arguments of various ‘specified’ configurations of material particles, which have been a staple of the arguments against neo-Darwinism, simply do not apply since the cause is not within the material particles in the first place! ,,,To refute this falsification of neo-Darwinism, one must overturn Alain Aspect, and company’s, falsification of local realism (reductive materialism) ! ================= Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger by Richard Conn Henry – Physics Professor – John Hopkins University Excerpt: Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the “illusion” of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism (solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist). (Dr. Henry’s referenced experiment and paper – “An experimental test of non-local realism” by S. Gröblacher et. al., Nature 446, 871, April 2007 – “To be or not to be local” by Alain Aspect, Nature 446, 866, April 2007 ================= And to dovetail into Dembski and Marks’s previous work on Conservation of Information;,,,
LIFE’S CONSERVATION LAW: Why Darwinian Evolution Cannot Create Biological Information William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II http://evoinfo.org/publications/lifes-conservation-law/
,,,Encoded ‘classical’ information such as what Dembski and Marks demonstrated the conservation of, and such as what we find encoded in computer programs, and yes, as we find encoded in DNA, is found to be a subset of ‘transcendent’ (beyond space and time) quantum entanglement/information by the following method:,,, ,,,This following research provides solid falsification for the late Rolf Landauer’s decades old contention that the information encoded in a computer is merely physical (merely ‘emergent’ from a material basis) since he believed it always required energy to erase it;
Quantum knowledge cools computers: New understanding of entropy – June 2011 Excerpt: No heat, even a cooling effect; In the case of perfect classical knowledge of a computer memory (zero entropy), deletion of the data requires in theory no energy at all. The researchers prove that “more than complete knowledge” from quantum entanglement with the memory (negative entropy) leads to deletion of the data being accompanied by removal of heat from the computer and its release as usable energy. This is the physical meaning of negative entropy. Renner emphasizes, however, “This doesn’t mean that we can develop a perpetual motion machine.” The data can only be deleted once, so there is no possibility to continue to generate energy. The process also destroys the entanglement, and it would take an input of energy to reset the system to its starting state. The equations are consistent with what’s known as the second law of thermodynamics: the idea that the entropy of the universe can never decrease. Vedral says “We’re working on the edge of the second law. If you go any further, you will break it.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110601134300.htm
,,,And to dot the i’s, and cross the t’s, here is the empirical confirmation that quantum information is in fact ‘conserved’;,,,
Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment. http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-quantum-no-hiding-theorem-experimentally.html
Further note:
Three subsets of sequence complexity and their relevance to biopolymeric information – Abel, Trevors Excerpt: Shannon information theory measures the relative degrees of RSC and OSC. Shannon information theory cannot measure FSC (Functional Sequence Complexity). FSC is invariably associated with all forms of complex biofunction, including biochemical pathways, cycles, positive and negative feedback regulation, and homeostatic metabolism. The algorithmic programming of FSC, not merely its aperiodicity, accounts for biological organization. No empirical evidence exists of either RSC of OSC ever having produced a single instance of sophisticated biological organization. Organization invariably manifests FSC rather than successive random events (RSC) or low-informational self-ordering phenomena (OSC).,,, Testable hypotheses about FSC What testable empirical hypotheses can we make about FSC that might allow us to identify when FSC exists? In any of the following null hypotheses [137], demonstrating a single exception would allow falsification. We invite assistance in the falsification of any of the following null hypotheses: Null hypothesis #1 Stochastic ensembles of physical units cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function. Null hypothesis #2 Dynamically-ordered sequences of individual physical units (physicality patterned by natural law causation) cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function. Null hypothesis #3 Statistically weighted means (e.g., increased availability of certain units in the polymerization environment) giving rise to patterned (compressible) sequences of units cannot program algorithmic/cybernetic function. Null hypothesis #4 Computationally successful configurable switches cannot be set by chance, necessity, or any combination of the two, even over large periods of time. We repeat that a single incident of nontrivial algorithmic programming success achieved without selection for fitness at the decision-node programming level would falsify any of these null hypotheses. This renders each of these hypotheses scientifically testable. We offer the prediction that none of these four hypotheses will be falsified. http://www.tbiomed.com/content/2/1/29
The following describes how quantum entanglement is related to functional information:
Quantum Entanglement and Information Excerpt: A pair of quantum systems in an entangled state can be used as a quantum information channel to perform computational and cryptographic tasks that are impossible for classical systems. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/
Anton Zeilinger, a leading researcher in Quantum mechanics, relates how quantum entanglement is related to quantum teleportation in this following video;
Quantum Entanglement and Teleportation – Anton Zeilinger – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5705317/
A bit more detail on how teleportation is actually achieved, by extension of quantum entanglement principles, is here:
Quantum Teleportation Excerpt: To perform the teleportation, Alice and Bob must have a classical communication channel and must also share quantum entanglement — in the protocol we employ*, each possesses one half of a two-particle entangled state. http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~qoptics/teleport.html
bornagain77
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:58 AM
3
03
58
AM
PDT
Fossfur you state:
Falsify that if you dare!
Since kairos has laid out the falsification criteria of ID, how about we just falsify neo-Darwinism instead? Falsification Of Neo-Darwinism by Quantum Entanglement/Information Neo-Darwinian evolution purports to explain all the wondrously amazing complexity of life on earth by reference solely to chance and necessity processes acting on energy and matter (i.e. purely material processes). In fact neo-Darwinian evolution makes the grand materialistic claim that the staggering levels of unmatched complex functional information we find in life, and even the ‘essence of life’ itself, simply ‘emerged’ from purely material processes. And even though this basic scientific point, of the ability of purely material processes to generate even trivial levels of complex functional information, has spectacularly failed to be established, we now have a much greater proof, than this stunning failure for validation, that ‘put the lie’ to the grand claims of neo-Darwinian evolution. This proof comes from the fact that it is now shown from quantum mechanics that ‘information’ is its own unique ‘physical’ entity. A physical entity that is shown to be completely independent of any energy-matter space-time constraints, i.e. it does not ‘emerge’ from a material basis. Moreover this ‘transcendent information’ is shown to be dominant of energy-matter in that this ‘information’ is shown to be the entity that is in fact constraining the energy-matter processes of the cell to be so far out of thermodynamic equilibrium. notes: First, Here is the falsification of local realism (reductive materialism). Here is a clip of a talk in which Alain Aspect talks about the failure of ‘local realism’, or the failure of reductive materialism, to explain reality:
The Failure Of Local Realism – Reductive Materialism – Alain Aspect – video http://www.metacafe.com/w/4744145
The falsification for local realism (reductive materialism) was recently greatly strengthened:
'Quantum Magic' Without Any 'Spooky Action at a Distance' - June 2011 Excerpt: A team of researchers led by Anton Zeilinger at the University of Vienna and the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information of the Austrian Academy of Sciences used a system which does not allow for entanglement, and still found results which cannot be interpreted classically. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110624111942.htm Physicists close two loopholes while violating local realism – November 2010 Excerpt: The latest test in quantum mechanics provides even stronger support than before for the view that nature violates local realism and is thus in contradiction with a classical worldview. http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-physicists-loopholes-violating-local-realism.html Quantum Measurements: Common Sense Is Not Enough, Physicists Show – July 2009 Excerpt: scientists have now proven comprehensively in an experiment for the first time that the experimentally observed phenomena cannot be described by non-contextual models with hidden variables. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090722142824.htm
of note: hidden variables were postulated to remove the need for ‘spooky’ forces, as Einstein termed them — forces that act instantaneously at great distances, thereby breaking the most cherished rule of relativity theory, that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This following video illustrates just how 'spooky', to use Einstein’s infamous word, this quantum action truly is:
Light and Quantum Entanglement Reflect Some Characteristics Of God – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4102182/
And yet, this ‘spooky’ quantum entanglement, which rigorously falsified local realism (reductive materialism) as the ‘true’ description of reality, is now found in molecular biology on a massive scale!
Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA & Protein Folding – short video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5936605/ Quantum entanglement holds together life’s blueprint – 2010 Excerpt: When the researchers analysed the DNA without its helical structure, they found that the electron clouds were not entangled. But when they incorporated DNA’s helical structure into the model, they saw that the electron clouds of each base pair became entangled with those of its neighbours (arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053v1). “If you didn’t have entanglement, then DNA would have a simple flat structure, and you would never get the twist that seems to be important to the functioning of DNA,” says team member Vlatko Vedral of the University of Oxford. http://neshealthblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/quantum-entanglement-holds-together-lifes-blueprint/ The relevance of continuous variable entanglement in DNA – July 2010 Excerpt: We consider a chain of harmonic oscillators with dipole-dipole interaction between nearest neighbours resulting in a van der Waals type bonding. The binding energies between entangled and classically correlated states are compared. We apply our model to DNA. By comparing our model with numerical simulations we conclude that entanglement may play a crucial role in explaining the stability of the DNA double helix. http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053v1
Quantum Entanglement/Information is confirmed in DNA by direct observation here;
DNA Can Discern Between Two Quantum States, Research Shows – June 2011 Excerpt: — DNA — can discern between quantum states known as spin. – The researchers fabricated self-assembling, single layers of DNA attached to a gold substrate. They then exposed the DNA to mixed groups of electrons with both directions of spin. Indeed, the team’s results surpassed expectations: The biological molecules reacted strongly with the electrons carrying one of those spins, and hardly at all with the others. The longer the molecule, the more efficient it was at choosing electrons with the desired spin, while single strands and damaged bits of DNA did not exhibit this property. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110331104014.htm
bornagain77
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:56 AM
3
03
56
AM
PDT
F/N: I saw a peculiar thing, my account labelled anonymous in the preview box while being written, which is happening again. WordPress Bug?kairosfocus
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:35 AM
3
03
35
AM
PDT
Fossfur Kindly lay off the strawman distortions. If you could show empirically that blind chance and necessity can produce functionally specific complex information beyond 500 - 1,000 bits (without smuggling in intelligence), the design inference and theory would collapse. The most directly relevant tests are those of random text generation, which show that spaces of 10^50 possibilities can be searched successfully, but the relevant scopes of search start at 10^100 beyond that. Going beyond, as you know or should know if you are going to seriously comment at UD, the scientific issue is to reconstruct the unobserved past using inference to best explanation on observed evidence and reasonably inferred causal dynamics in the present. That is the exact issue confronted by the likes of Lyell and Darwin in seeking to scientifically investigate natural history. In the case of the living cell, in the heart of the cell is digitally coded, functionally specific prescriptive information, in DNA and molecules informationally derived from it. That information ranges form about 100 - 1 mn bits at the low end, up to billions of bits. The ONLY observationally justified causal process for such digital information in such quantities is design, including design of the GAs sometimes used as an attempted counter-example. In that context, we are strongly entitled to infer that such dFSCI in particular is a reliable signature of design. So strong is this that we see objectors trying to tell us that the digital information in DNA is not digital information [e.g. I found the reference to its being alphabetic instead particularly astonishingly ill-informed], and the algorithmic, step by step processes by which it is put to work are not algorithmic processes [because they use the materials and forces of chemistry to do the work, as though it is not the case that engineering NORMALLY uses the materials and forces of nature!]. GEM of TKIkairosfocus
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:33 AM
3
03
33
AM
PDT
Though the whole interview is excellent, this clip on epistemology is relevant:
RC Sproul Interviews Stephen Meyer, Part 4 of 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM5J2zTBIzI
Further notes;
Science and Theism: Concord, not Conflict* – Robert C. Koons IV. The Dependency of Science Upon Theism (Page 21) Excerpt: Far from undermining the credibility of theism, the remarkable success of science in modern times is a remarkable confirmation of the truth of theism. It was from the perspective of Judeo-Christian theism—and from the perspective alone—that it was predictable that science would have succeeded as it has. Without the faith in the rational intelligibility of the world and the divine vocation of human beings to master it, modern science would never have been possible, and, even today, the continued rationality of the enterprise of science depends on convictions that can be reasonably grounded only in theistic metaphysics. http://www.robkoons.net/media/69b0dd04a9d2fc6dffff80b3ffffd524.pdf
Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place:
Should You Trust the Monkey Mind? - Joe Carter Excerpt: Evolutionary naturalism assumes that our noetic equipment developed as it did because it had some survival value or reproductive advantage. Unguided evolution does not select for belief except insofar as the belief improves the chances of survival. The truth of a belief is irrelevant, as long as it produces an evolutionary advantage. This equipment could have developed at least four different kinds of belief that are compatible with evolutionary naturalism, none of which necessarily produce true and trustworthy cognitive faculties. http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/09/should-you-trust-the-monkey-mind
The following interview is sadly comical as a evolutionary psychologist realizes that neo-Darwinism can offer no guarantee that our faculties of reasoning will correspond to the truth, not even for the truth he is giving in the interview, (which begs the question of how was he able to come to that particular truthful realization, in the first place, if neo-Darwinian evolution were actually true?);
Evolutionary guru: Don't believe everything you think - October 2011 Interviewer: You could be deceiving yourself about that.(?) Evolutionary Psychologist: Absolutely. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128335.300-evolutionary-guru-dont-believe-everything-you-think.html
further notes:
“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning...” CS Lewis – Mere Christianity "But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" - Charles Darwin - Letter To William Graham - July 3, 1881 “It seems to me immensely unlikely that mind is a mere by-product of matter. For if my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms.” J. B. S. Haldane ["When I am dead," in Possible Worlds: And Other Essays [1927], Chatto and Windus: London, 1932, reprint, p.209.
This following video humorously reveals the bankruptcy that atheists have in trying to ground rational beliefs within a materialistic worldview;
John Cleese – The Scientists – humorous video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M-vnmejwXo
verse and music:
Luke 8:35 and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting at Jesus' feet, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. Alison Krauss - There Is A Reason http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWXNm9b6pKs
bornagain77
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
03:17 AM
3
03
17
AM
PDT
Seeing design and identifying a designer are two different things - you may effect one event without the other. Regarding the process, that of designing, we have examples of that in ourselves, so the prcess is known, in part, though applied to much simpler processes than those found in biological systems, but it can be inferred that design processes for the simpler systems have similar components. (If you're a theist, or Creationsist, it's perfectly legitimate to assert our attempts at design are miniature, though inferior, images of processes inherent to the Creator.) As to unknown point in the past - pinpointing a date for the advent of a design, though maybe possible, has no bearing on the more fundamental question of design proper. Regarding the design hypothesis and falsification - randomly produce a living system under laboratory conditions, and you've likely made a big step on the path to falsifying the theory. In answer to the question - no.arkady967
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
02:41 AM
2
02
41
AM
PDT
But it must be asked, if a brain does this automatically, how would you know? It would be an unconscious process, one inivisble to the bearer, one possesed by all "evolved" subjects and operating, supposedly, in researcher and subject simulaneously. That would seem to render Shermer's comments the aritfact of the process he's attempting to describe - his brain is simply searching for patterns and infusing them, and any meaning the appear to containt, into the material he publishes and the comments he makes. The things he says, the assertions he makes, therefore, don't actually have content, it's just the random process of a brain drawing a line connecting dots for the sake of survival in a world that can never be understood by an evolutionary automaton.arkady967
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
02:30 AM
2
02
30
AM
PDT
The ostensible subject of the piece is that reliable checkout counter tabloid icon, the “prophet” Nostradamus, who was obscure for an entirely unrelated reason – to avoid falsification. Reminds one of something, no … ?
It does indeed remind one of something. It's reminiscent of the ID hypothesis....to wit: An unknown something, via an unknown process, designed an unkown thing at some unknown point in the past. Falsify that if you dare!Fossfur
November 2, 2011
November
11
Nov
2
02
2011
01:01 AM
1
01
01
AM
PDT
1 10 11 12

Leave a Reply