Re: Dembski and calls for examples

From: FMAJ1019@aol.com
Date: Sun Oct 01 2000 - 18:51:19 EDT

  • Next message: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: Numerical Significance"

    In a message dated 10/1/2000 3:39:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
    welsberr@inia.cls.org writes:

    << Richard's insistence upon worked-out examples
    is a simple and clear means to this desired end. Given
    Dembski's exhortation to "do the probability calculation" on
    p.228 of TDI, one would hope that Dembski has already worked
    out a variety of examples in detail that would support his
    claims made concerning the application of TDI to biological
    systems. If this is not the case, it is also important to
    know upon what other basis Dembski is making those claims. >>

        "At no step --not even one-- does Doolittle give a model that includes
        numbers or quantities; without numbers there is not science."
        
        Behe pp. 95 Darwin's Black Box



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 01 2000 - 18:51:42 EDT