RE: [asa] Biologic Institute

Rich Blinne wrote:

"The XVIVO animator argued that the process shown was highly simplified and
parts were removed so that things could be more easily seen. The movie
copied the exact same simplifications where other illustrators did it
completely differently."

This seems to be an example of "intelligent design" creating something
intentionally that was less complex, rather than more complex. I'm not sure
how this can be applied to Intelligent Design in general, but it's
interesting. It could be taken as a case in point against your statement
about the C-value paradox being an argument against design. (I'm not saying
that your argument doesn't have substantial merit in its own right.) Just
because the human genome seems to be simpler than other genomes, doesn't
mean intelligence couldn't be invoked.

But if this example could argue for ID, could it not also function as an
argument against ID? If we look at something of lesser complexity and see
intelligent design, and look at something of greater complexity and see
intelligent design, doesn't it illustrate that intelligence is in the eye of
the beholder, and that the conclusion was either indeterminate or biased
(predetermined) from the outset?

Jon Tandy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 14 07:28:50 2008