From: Glenn Morton (glenn.morton@btinternet.com)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 01:23:29 EST
Iain, you must realize, that Dembski's argument absolutely fails because
Caesar cyphers are not the only encoding routines available. What I
presented was merely an illustration of the ease with which one can find a
code which will turn any random sequence into a 'designed' sequence. Indeed,
the best available cypher code involves the use of a keyword which is
precisely as long as the code. This gives very little ability to decipher
the text. Such keywords perform a modulo arithmetic between two
corresponding letters (one from the text and one from the code). The output
is another letter but which appears meaningless. Now, given any random
text, one can design a keyword code which will transform it into a
meaningful sentence or paragraph. So, if one has the random sequence:
frinmrcsxmktybevvrmhutevmuk
And apply a Vigenere cypher to it of:
yymeqnckxkynlhpvypryifrdsyb
It turns that sequence into the first line of a limerick!
therewasayoungladyfromniger
Or take a really long sequence:
jwfldusfglttbncxpnzoqvvbavd
fwjlqrfghanhvmfljmfrqqanm
ljujouoyeacanagkxhkbw
nuojpewzlmklj
apkspzavxgrmctobrbcnfedttxbty
Using the keyword:
cdjchqsxgjhnotoxcjgcivdjgjg
rqbejyntriglsojpmusxbooqp
tobntcbbwtjagtnspabfa
pibcxrqddfymn
wwofigembyeaqgsbspwgnrwaxnvtb
Becomes a famous limerick on quantum:
therewasayoungmanwhosaidgod
mustthinkitexceedinglyodd
ifhefindsthatthistree
continuestobe
whentheresnooneaboutinthequad
For the spatiall challenged:
there was a young man who said god
must think it exceedingly odd
if he finds that this tree
continues to be
when theres no one about in the quad
Every single sequence has the capacity to be a designed spy code.
My point is this. Dembski claims that if one can provide a spy code which
turns a random sequence into a meaningful sequence, then what his method
says isn't designed suddenly becomes designed. Since I have shown that
every single random sequence can be turned into a meaningful sentence, it
means that Dembski's method can't distinguish designed sequences from
non-designed.
I don't care how long you make the random sequence, I can turn it into a
meaningful sentence of that length with great ease. Thus, Dembski's claim to
be able to detect design is meaningless. Since he can't rule out that any
given random sequence isn't a designed sequence because he must always worry
about a Vignere keyword which is capable of turning his random, non-designed
sequence into a designed one. Thus, Dembski's approach only allows us to
recognize design in things we KNOW a priori are designed. For things like
life, Dembski is assuming
glenn
see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 18 2002 - 01:23:30 EST