Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,255 Year: 5,512/9,624 Month: 537/323 Week: 34/143 Day: 7/17 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can't ID be tested AT ALL?
ohnhai
Member (Idle past 5279 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 116 of 304 (308038)
04-30-2006 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Cold Foreign Object
09-14-2005 8:41 PM


Re: How to Measure Complexity
computer chip v. human cell
In your first post you analogy of Chip v Cell was all about pure storage capacity. (How many copies of the Encyclopaedia Britannica an organism could store.)
I’m assuming that Dawkins and, by quoting him, you take ”store’ to mean that if the base pairs could be arranged to code for text and pictures then there is enough base pairs in a human cell to code for the EB a few times over, more in other organisms.
As we know to measure the size of a text in terms of bytes for computer storage that give a direct measurement in Giga or Tera Bytes for the ”theoretical’ storage capacity of any organism.
If this storage concept is a valid measure of complexity then for ID purposes you will always be able to remove storage capacity. In these terms complexity will only be irreducible if the organism has zero storage capacity, but then of course it would not exist.
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 04-30-2006 06:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-14-2005 8:41 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

ohnhai
Member (Idle past 5279 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 149 of 304 (311918)
05-15-2006 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by RAZD
05-14-2006 9:43 PM


Re: What IC means and what it doesn't.
RAZD writes:
This among other observations is a clear evidence for ID.
No, it is clear evidence of evolution because that is what was observed.
This is one hard core solid fact about science: when a concept is invalidated it has been proven to be false.
This experiment is a total, complete invalidation of the concept that "irreducible complexity" is 'evidence' for "ID" and no amount of denial changes that fact -- "IC" is not evidence for "ID" because "IC" evolves naturally and easily.
Thus "IC" as evidence for "ID" is a falsified concept.
Thus this cannot be evidence for "ID" -- it is logically impossible.
Indeed. Observed IC, achieved through recorded Evolution events does not ID make! Quite the opposite infact.
Edited by ohnhai, : added quote block (and sig)

All things being equal, It's time to tip the scales...
Ohnhai
http://www.ohnhai.com http://www.thewildmachines.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2006 9:43 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by RAZD, posted 05-16-2006 9:18 PM ohnhai has replied

ohnhai
Member (Idle past 5279 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 151 of 304 (312773)
05-17-2006 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by RAZD
05-16-2006 9:18 PM


Re: What IC means and what it doesn't.
The whole crux of the {ID} argument is that {ID} is defined as ”{IC} = ~{E}’ (Impossible through Evolution) thus if it is shown that ”{IC} = {E}’ (Can happen through Evolution) then {ID} has to be false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by RAZD, posted 05-16-2006 9:18 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Brad McFall, posted 05-17-2006 1:44 PM ohnhai has not replied
 Message 153 by RAZD, posted 05-17-2006 6:58 PM ohnhai has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024