Darwinism Intelligent Design

The last five years for ID: All renovation projects start as teardowns

Spread the love
 Dumpster Rental Services Burlington

In “The last five years: Darwin’s failures are positive sources of information for ID,” I noted

Failures of Darwinism are not merely a negative. They are a positive. The growing number of stress points at which Darwinism fails can, taken together, form a picture, one that points to general laws that govern how high levels of information are produced in life forms. Obviously, as with dpi, the more such points, the clearer the picture. We can’t have too many of them, though eventually, there will be enough to work productively with.

Throwing out assorted Darwinisms is like renovating a shamefully treated century home. The first thing we do is rent a dumpster. Because we must clear away the rubbish to rescue the core value.

One outcome is that 99% of the initial work is, unavoidably, teardown.

In the case of evolution, as Mike Behe realizes, we must compute the edge of natural selection’s ability to create new information: Just beyond that edge – or further – lie the principal sources of new information.

Computing the edge alone involves a number of questions: Is it the same for all life forms? If not, which ones differ and what characteristics might they have in common? Can a general law be derived?

Of course, sidelining the usual, tiresome, untethered “Darwin dunit” accounts would be a plus, but it is certainly not the motive for the project. The motive is to understand what really happened, not to demolish a crumbling elite piety.

See also: How far has ID come in the last five years

Follow UD News at Twitter!

5 Replies to “The last five years for ID: All renovation projects start as teardowns

  1. 1
    NickMatzke_UD says:

    Hmm. Say that one discovers the “edge” of evolution in a single step is, say, X bits. What then prevents a system that has successfully acquired X bits from acquiring another X bits in another step? And another, and another…

  2. 2
    Joseph says:

    Darwinism, Nick, as in blind, undirected chemical processes.

    But anyways “bits”? Really? Do you have anything which demonstrates an accumulation of genetic accidents can construct new and useful multi-part systems?

    Say a system has thousands of parts- remember Dr Behe’s mousetrap only had 5- what is the positive evidence that accumulating accidents can produce such a thing?

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    Nick, Your question about ‘functional information bits’, adding up cumulatively, reflects the main question of dispute that is between Darwinists and IDists. i.e. Where is the functional information coming from? Darwinists maintain that the fantastic, and unmatched, levels of complex functional information, we find in life, simply ‘cumulatively emerged’ from a chance and necessity process operating on a material (energy/matter) basis over vast eons of time, whereas IDists correctly observe that no one has ever seen such complex functional information ’emerging’ in such a fashion from any material basis. As well, IDists correctly observe that intelligence is the only known entity that has ever been seen generating complex functional information, and implementing the complex functional information onto a material basis to solve specific problems that need to be solved (most clearly demonstrated with robotic computer systems). So since the question of, “What is the source of complex functional ‘information’?”, is the main point of dispute between Darwinsts and IDists, Nick, let us take a closer look at what ‘information’ really is and see if we can shed a little more light on who is correct, Darwinists or IDists, in this dispute;

    Information? What Is It Really? Professor Andy McIntosh – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/4739025

    As Professor McIntosh points out in the preceding video, information is a very elusive entity to nail down, for though we can write it down, encode it, and transfer the information from one material medium to another completely different material medium, the information never changes its meaning though the material mediums, on which the information is stored, are completely different upon the information’s transfer.,,, It is also interesting to note that a Compact Disc crammed with information on it weighs exactly the same as a CD with no information on it whatsoever.,, i.e. Information, from our everyday experience, gives every indication of being completely transcendent of any material basis. i.e. Information gives every indication of being ‘real’ and yet it also gives every indication of being transcendent of time and space though it may be stored on various material mediums. Moreover, although our everyday experience gives us a very enigmatic picture of ‘information’, breakthroughs in quantum mechanics have given us a more complete picture of ‘information’ and its place (prominence) in the overall structure of reality;

    Here is a clip of a talk in which Alain Aspect talks about the failure of ‘local realism’, or the failure of materialism, to explain reality since quantum entanglement/information is now conclusively shown to be ‘non-local’ (i.e. instantaneous, as well as completely transcendent of any space-time (material) constraints):

    Quantum Entanglement – The Failure Of Local Realism – Materialism – Alain Aspect – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/4744145

    This falsification for local realism (materialism), discussed by Aspect in the preceding video, was recently greatly strengthened:

    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/20.....alism.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/re.....142824.htm

    Quantum entanglement is shown to be related to ‘functional information’ by the following evidence;

    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/

    And yet Quantum Entanglement/Information, which falsified ‘local realism (materialism), is found to be in life:

    Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA & Protein Folding – short video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5936605/

    Quantum Computing in DNA – Stuart Hameroff
    Excerpt: Hypothesis: DNA utilizes quantum information and quantum computation for various functions. Superpositions of dipole states of base pairs consisting of purine (A,G) and pyrimidine (C,T) ring structures play the role of qubits, and quantum communication (coherence, entanglement, non-locality) occur in the “pi stack” region of the DNA molecule.,,, We can then consider DNA as a chain of qubits (with helical twist).
    Output of quantum computation would be manifest as the net electron interference pattern in the quantum state of the pi stack, regulating gene expression and other functions locally and nonlocally by radiation or entanglement.
    http://www.quantumconsciousnes.....InDNA.html

    Quantum Action confirmed in DNA by direct empirical research;

    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/re.....104014.htm

    Indeed the ‘computation’ accomplished by the quantum entanglement within DNA is very impressive:

    Quantum Dots Spotlight DNA-Repair Proteins in Motion – March 2010
    Excerpt: “How this system works is an important unanswered question in this field,” he said. “It has to be able to identify very small mistakes in a 3-dimensional morass of gene strands. It’s akin to spotting potholes on every street all over the country and getting them fixed before the next rush hour.” Dr. Bennett Van Houten – of note: A bacterium has about 40 team members on its pothole crew. That allows its entire genome to be scanned for errors in 20 minutes, the typical doubling time.,, These smart machines can apparently also interact with other damage control teams if they cannot fix the problem on the spot.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....123522.htm

  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    continued:

    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/

    And quantum teleporation showed that atoms, which are suppose to be the basis from which functional information ’emerges’, in the neo-Darwinian framework, are now shown to be, in fact, reducible to the functional information that the atoms are suppose to be the basis of!

    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/chemistrywo.....ammeup.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/fo.....1769/posts

    Nick, please tell me how quantum information/entanglement can ’emerge’ from any material basis of atoms when atoms are now shown to reduce to a transcendent basis of quantum information? Do you see the problem here Nick???

    Moreover, as you well know Nick, the dispute between IDists and Darwinists has, thus far, not focused on quantum information so much, but has instead focused on ‘classical information’,

    “LIFE’S CONSERVATION LAW: Why Darwinian Evolution Cannot Create Biological Information”:
    Excerpt: Though not denying Darwinian evolution or even limiting its role in the history of life, the Law of Conservation of Information shows that Darwinian evolution is inherently teleological. Moreover, it shows that this teleology can be measured in precise information-theoretic terms. http://evoinfo.org/publication.....ation-law/

    William Dembski Is Interviewed By Casey Luskin About Conservation Of Information – Audio
    http://intelligentdesign.podom.....4_01-07_00

    Yet, though the dispute between Darwinists and IDist has been over ‘classical information,, classical information is shown to be a subset of quantum information by the following method:

    This following research provides solid falsification for Rolf Landauer’s contention that information encoded in a computer is merely physical (“Information is physical!” – Rolf Landauer) (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/re.....134300.htm

    And quantum information is shown, empirically, to be ‘conserved’:

    Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time – March 2011
    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.
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....tally.html

    Further notes:

    The Law of Physicodynamic Insufficiency – Dr David L. Abel – November 2010
    Excerpt: “If decision-node programming selections are made randomly or by law rather than with purposeful intent, no non-trivial (sophisticated) function will spontaneously arise.”,,, After ten years of continual republication of the null hypothesis with appeals for falsification, no falsification has been provided. The time has come to extend this null hypothesis into a formal scientific prediction: “No non trivial algorithmic/computational utility will ever arise from chance and/or necessity alone.”
    http://www.scitopics.com/The_L.....iency.html

    hree 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. 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

  5. 5
    ScottAndrews says:

    The “edge of evolution” refers to extent of the changes that evolution can effect, not the size of the individual steps. At present there is no reason to think that edge encompasses the transition from single-celled organisms to humans, land mammals to whales, or even rodents to bats.
    What seems intuitive to most people has been supported by research. Variation and selection produce change, but only so much change.
    It’s no wonder the term “microevolution” is scorned. It separates what is observed from what is imagined, when it’s so much more convenient to lump the two together.

Leave a Reply