From: Josh Bembenek (jbembe@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Nov 05 2002 - 21:20:24 EST
Dr. Campbell-
I'm no mathematician, so my view of the filter is very superficial at best.
My "version" is simply the concept that if we had ability to apply all the
appropriate variables required to generate a probability for various
occurences, we could determine if they are within the scope of chance or
not, referring to what is defined as specified complexity. If memory serves
correctly this number combines the number of events equal to the number of
atoms in the universe coupled with the amount of time since the big bang (or
something like that.) The trick here is assigning the appropriate values to
all the appropriate variables, (neither of which are known with any degree
of confidence IMO.) Luckily, I won't be the one "applying" Dembski's filter
theories, but hopefully I've understood them correctly.
Josh
>I have seen various versions of Dembski's filters and have not found them
>convincing, but have not kept up with the latest version. Could you
>describe the version of the filter that you are advocating? Thanks!
>
> Dr. David Campbell
> Old Seashells
> University of Alabama
> Biodiversity & Systematics
> Dept. Biological Sciences
> Box 870345
> Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA
> bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
>
>That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
>Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
>Droitgate Spa
>
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: "Josh Bembenek" <jbembe@hotmail.com>
>Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:26:41 +0000
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Josh Bembenek wrote:
> >>
> >> >IMO ID is perfectly compatible with a theory which states that
> >> >initial conditions held all capacity to derive life given by God.
> >>
> >>The point of departure is "intervention." TE denies it. ID demands
> >>it. So "perfectly compatible," they are not.
> >>
> >>If you read Genesis 1 carefully you will see that the Hebrew word bara
>for
> >>"create" is used in three specific instances. God created the "heaven
>and
> >>earth" (Gen. 1:1), God created sea life (Gen. 1:21), and God created
>Adam
> >>(Gen. 1:27). God also commanded: "let the earth (land) bring forth"
>(Gen.
> >>1:11), and "let the waters bring forth" (Gen. 1:20), clearly delegating
>and
> >>delineating between his personal acts of creation and the impersonal
>acts
> >>of nature.
> >>
> >>Postulating intermediate specific acts of special creation is without
> >>scriptural support. Since there is no evidence for ID, and Scripture
> >>doesn't require it, who needs it?
> >
> >
> >Again, the application of Dembski's filter is the best way to demonstrate
> >the veracity of your claim. The question doesn't rest solely on
> >identification of the designer, but also extent of design- both can be
> >ascertain in theory by the explanatory filter. A rigourous method should
>be
> >generated for making these claims, shall we only rest upon the revelation
> >from the bible to state our claims about the identity of the designer and
> >the nature of his actions?
> >
> >
> >Josh
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month.Y¥ Try MSN!
> >http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 08 2002 - 20:33:17 EST