Design Detection — It’s Everywhere!

"Well done that man. Now you know why (in a simple sense) why Dembski is wrong." You haven't read one work on Intelligent Design, have you? Ben Z

"I understand it from the paper you referred me to, would require checking papers for plagiarism without having any source that is being plagiarized… which I don’t think makes much sense." Well done that man. Now you know why (in a simple sense) why Dembski is wrong. 2perfection

I think there is a fundamental difference between what is being detected here and what specified complexity is supposed to detect. What plagiarism detection looks for is the degree to which a paper matches another paper which already exists. To apply specified complexity to this, as I understand it from the paper you referred me to, would require checking papers for plagiarism without having any source that is being plagiarized... which I don't think makes much sense. earthenvesselmz

As a follow on, go here to read an excerpt from the first book. http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0471396850/ref=sib_dp_bod_toc/104-8208545-7829514?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S00A#reader-page PjB

Here is what might be an interesting book. "The Subjectivity of Scientists and the Bayesian Approach" "the authors show how scientists use their personal beliefs to arrive at scientific conclusions and how that process has been formalized in modern times through the Bayesian approach." -Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471396850.html See also, "Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists" http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0470843675.html PjB