Re: dembski review

From: dfsiemensjr@juno.com
Date: Thu Apr 20 2000 - 13:49:35 EDT

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: dembski review"

    George, you're kinder to Dembski than I would be. I haven't finished
    _Intelligent Design_ yet, but find some grave problems. For example, in
    Ch. 2 he critiques the definitions by Spinoza and Schleiermacher that
    exclude miracles. But in Ch. 4 he does essentially the same with TE.
    About p. 111 he produces a caricature of theistic evolutionists which is
    unrecognizable from within. In connection with information, he does not
    mention that the mammalian genome has more information than that of
    insects, some of which could be derived by duplication and modification:
    1 homeobox vs. 4, if I recall correctly, all clearly homologous. Note
    also the red and green visual pigments on the X chromosome. The types of
    alteration involved are well documented as occurring.

    One must grant that two copies of the same information produces no
    increase. But one copy may be modified by point mutation, inversion,
    deletion or insertion to produce new information while the original
    maintains the data necessary for the development or well-being of the
    creature. However, this does not solve the problem of the ultimate origin
    of information. However, he _knows_ that the Almighty is not competent to
    include it in either the original creation of the universe, or even the
    creation of the first life. But how does one restrict the power of
    omnipotence?

    Dave



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 14:54:36 EDT