RE: Design detection and minimum description length

From: Glenn Morton (glenn.morton@btinternet.com)
Date: Sun Nov 24 2002 - 03:32:43 EST

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "Re: Dembski and Caesar Ciphers"

    Iain wrote:

    >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    >Behalf Of Iain Strachan
    >Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 8:44 PM

    >It is a method of detecting non-random phenomena, of which "design"
    >is one example, and correlation is another. This was simply
    >addressing Glenn's point. It remains a debatable point as to whether
    >if you find a sequence (such as a DNA code) that has a probability of
    >less than Dembski's "Universal Probability Bound" of 10^-150, that
    >you can reasonably attribute that to "Intelligent Design", or whether
    >you might equally say "Design by Evolution". But I was not
    >addressing that particular point.

    No, it wasn't addressing my point because I have never ever, in any of these
    threads used mathematical examples. I have been using sequences of letters
    which is analogous to what Dembski is wanting to do in detecting design in
    living systems. As I have said to you many times, you have been missing my
    point.

    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 25 2002 - 11:31:30 EST