|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Information Theory and Intelligent Design. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Don't get the wrong idea Razd... I am not seeking your forgiveness or pity. Lay it on me brother... Let the beatings begin. I can handle it now. It just took a long time to learn this whole longsuffering thing. It was hard to grasp even as a disciple.
Spit, kick, mock, impune, redicule, banish, condemn, lampoon, scorn, hate, laugh, scream, and destroy. I can't do it anymore... I leave that to you... You win! Eat drink and be merry... Rob
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Ok... So what I am hearing, is that I need to conform to reality (lose my life, so that I may find real life)... That I am wrong and that you are right (He who is not with me, is against me).
You guys sound like someone I know... but you don't believe in Him. I see no reason to continue this mock trial. I was guilty before the trial began, you only offer forgiveness if I repent. Again, it sounds familliar....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
"In every guilty man, there is some innocence. This makes every absolute condemnation revolting." Albert Camus
Is Mr. Camus absolutely condemning the concept of 'absolute condemnation'? He is! And he proves that justice must be absolute by imperitive and displays the irrationality that motivates a crowd to choose ignorance over reason when given a clear option. Such a choice is the lesser of the two threats to the will of the crowd who chooses to live their own way, absolutely. Matthew 27: 21 "Which of the two do you want me to release to you?" asked the governor. "Barabbas," they answered. 22 "What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?" Pilate asked. They all answered, "Crucify him!" 23 "Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!" 24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. "I am innocent of this man's blood," he said. "It is your responsibility!" Such a scene is absolutism, condemning absolutism. It is mankind killing the very thing that is the essence of his humanity. Is that Socratic enough for you guys? Anyone got any hemlock?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
blah blah blah what does any of this have to do with the topic? Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5952 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Iceage writes: There are others, but these are the simplest and suffice to counter his point. Furthermore while these properties maybe effected by "intelligent agents" they are not dependent on "intelligent agents". I am not a scientist by any means, but if you gave up the example of the two discs, and used instead, two corn snakes or such animal of different coloration, is it correct to say; the mass is the same (can be) and that while there is a difference in information, this is obviously not dependent on intelligent design? Or in other words, even if a creator allowed for these variants in information, they are easily explainable via natural means regardless of any 'agent'?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
It's a matter of logic, not science.
If all{A} = all{B} then all-not{A} = all-not{B} If all{A} = some{B} then all-not{A} ≠ all-not{B} as some {B} already = not{A} And you cannot derive which parts are {B} and which are not{B}. Enjoy. compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5952 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Rob writes: I see no reason to continue this mock trial. I was guilty before the trial began, you only offer forgiveness if I repent. How about a normal, honest post in a thread which you can handle, instead of the pre-fab material you use consistantly to cover every topic? I am not trying to be rude, but it is obvious even to fellow christians that you are repetitve, egotistical, off topic, etc. when you could very easily contribute something of yourself as every other christian here is capable of. It is never altogether easy, but it it is definitely possible to hold your views and not be banned.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
It's easy to be a cynic when everything is over your head.
Calculus means nothing to my five year old either. It's utterly irrelevant to playing with hotwheels. I'm sure you have other toys to amuse you... Don't let me stop you... live it up while there's still time! My point, was that all denunciation implies a moral doctrine. All moralizing and condemnation is accusatory of violating what is right. You moralize against moralizing. Suicide of thought... Don't moralize about anything and you will be happy. Don't let other people's sins ruin your life. Let them do their thing. But thank you DrJones. Your genius is always refreshing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5952 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
RAZD writes: It's a matter of logic, not science.If all{A} = all{B} then all-not{A} = all-not{B} If all{A} = some{B} then all-not{A} ≠ all-not{B} as some {B} already = not{A} And you cannot derive which parts are {B} and which are not{B}. Not from the equation, no. Maybe I am reading too much into it, but if all A=some B, then B is less than A, and then, a corn snake in its variety is missing some information that 'corsnake' in general has? Just asking, because in breeding of animals, that is often how it works, take zebra finches. The missing information is not discernible except through color, but the finch is still a whole finch. Anyway, this is beyond my abilities, or my expectations. Just thought it might serve the point better to use an object which has NOT obviously had an intelligent agent behind its design, as would a man-made disc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
My problem is that I do not yet take the advice i just gave to our dear DrJones.
I am trying to recruit the unrepentant. I have to let them go you know? But thanks for your honest rebuke A. Long way to go for me...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
but if all A=some B, then B is less than A, No, the other way around all{A} fits inside but does not cover all{B}, so some{B} is outside {A} and is not{A}.
Just asking, because in breeding of animals, that is often how it works, take zebra finches. The missing information is not discernible except through color, but the finch is still a whole finch. But what you can't tell is whether there is missing information that would have produced the color, or added information that blocks the color from being expressed or that changes the colors expressed. So you have not{A} - no color - but you don't know if you have {B} or not{B}. {abe} you also have the issue of recessive and dominant genes, so you could have recessive color that will show up again in later generations. In this case the "information" is neither lost nor gained.{/abe} Edited by RAZD, : [abe] compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
My point, was that all denunciation implies a moral doctrine
What does that have to do with the topic? Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5952 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
RAZD writes: {abe} you also have the issue of recessive and dominant genes, so you could have recessive color that will show up again in later generations. In this case the "information" is neither lost nor gained.{/abe} Yes, good point. Loss of color seems to indicate loss of information, but it certainly may not. The 'purest' breeding is when recessive genes are ousted to the best of an intelligent agent's ability, but often coincide with loss of functionality in the animal, again giving the appearance of loss of information. In that case, the 'intelligence' of any designer in designing a functional creature seems obvious, but this does not exclude the process of natural selection. We, as agents in design, have 'unnaturally' selected for the survival of the animal. Of course, dominant and recessive genes do not have to do with the color of a man-made disc, and it seemed more to the point to question 'intelligence' in the field of purely natural phenomena.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5952 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Rob writes: My problem is that I do not yet take the advice i just gave to our dear DrJones.I am trying to recruit the unrepentant. I have to let them go you know? So, take it. Turn over a new leaf right now. Post somewhere new, using entirely your own words, and wing it. If not, you are only selling yourself and your God short.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
A:
So, take it. Turn over a new leaf right now. Post somewhere new, using entirely your own words, and wing it. If not, you are only selling yourself and your God short. The first sentance of your advice is valid. I bow to it respectfully. The second is incorrect. 'In the beginning was the Word'. And God puts those words in our mouths. If He does not, then the last half is also true. They do not respect the Word. The truth is chaff to them. Straw is more real and as useless against them. They laugh at swords and arrows. But if you use your own words, they have won as well. It is brick instead of stone. I do not mean the words (and neither does scripture), I mean the ideas. Contradiction vs Non. 'A kingdom divided cannot stand'. I know you don't take it so far... It's ok. Godspeed...
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024