From: FMAJ1019@aol.com <FMAJ1019@aol.com>
>In a message dated 10/5/2000 10:35:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, DNAunion
>writes:
>
>
>> >FMAJ: Because we have direct evidence of the "evolution" of life and
>> species and mutation and natural selection.
>>
>> DNAunion: We have direct evidence of intelligent design: computers,
cars,
>> televisions.
>
>Cool but a non sequitor. We do not have evidence of inteligent design as it
>applies to biology.
>
> But more importantly, we have direct evidence of intelligent design in
>biology: genetic engineering and rational design
>> in protein engineering. In addition, we have direct evidence of
intelligent
>> design creating circuits that can undergo
>
>Again this is not evidence of biological design in existing biological
>systems. That humans can manipulate nature is not in question.
>
> mutation and selection, thus nature no longer has a monopoly on RM & NS as
a
>creative mechanism. In addition, we
>> have direct evidence of intelligent design creating robots that can
create
>> other robots: and self-replicating robots are highly probable before the
>> end of this century.
>>
>
>You are confused, that RM*NS can be used succesfully to design things is
not
>evidence that ID is required for RM*NS to work. On the contrary, it shows
>that RM*NS can be powerful algorithms that can generate CSI.
Hold your horses! Until Dembski clarifies the meaning of CSI, it's not clear
that *anything* can generate CSI.
I suggest you restrict yourself to saying that RMNS can generate
information. (But then you'd better be prepared to say what you mean by
information.)
Richard Wein (Tich)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 06 2000 - 12:16:19 EDT