"Specificity is key to understanding"
Specificity is key to understanding.
If that is true then one has to wonder what we understand about the theory of evolution and universal common descent.
I say that because neither of those offers anything specific. With UCD no one even knows whether or not the transformations required are even possible. And that means no one can specify the mutations that cause the physiological and anatomical differences observed.
Heck I have asked for a specific hypothesis to support the anti-ID position and have yet to see one.
blipey also said:
UCD is a pretty 2nd grade idea to grasp Joe.
Which I take to mean that evolutionitwits are dumber than 2nd graders because they cannot provide any specifics to support their position.
As a matter of fact UCD is determined by examining the circumstantial evidence in the light of UCD. Meaning if one was not biased towards UCD the circumstantial evidence would not support UCD.
In contrast Intelligent Design has (at least) two specified concepts that can be objectively tested-
1) Irreducible Complexity
IC- A system performing a given basic function is irreducibly complex if it includes a set of well-matched, mutually interacting, non-arbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is indispensable to maintaining the system’s basic, and therefore original, function. The set of these indispensable parts is known as the irreducible core of the system. Page 285 NFL
Numerous and Diverse Parts If the irreducible core of an IC system consists of one or only a few parts, there may be no insuperable obstacle to the Darwinian mechanism explaining how that system arose in one fell swoop. But as the number of indispensable well-fitted, mutually interacting,, non-arbitrarily individuated parts increases in number & diversity, there is no possibility of the Darwinian mechanism achieving that system in one fell swoop. Page 287
Minimal Complexity and Function Given an IC system with numerous & diverse parts in its core, the Darwinian mechanism must produce it gradually. But if the system needs to operate at a certain minimal level of function before it can be of any use to the organism & if to achieve that level of function it requires a certain minimal level of complexity already possessed by the irreducible core, the Darwinian mechanism has no functional intermediates to exploit. Page 287
2) Specified Complexity/ Complex Specified Information
"Complex sequences exhibit an irregular and improbable arrangement that defies expression by a simple formula or algorithm. A specification, on the other hand, is a match or correspondence between an event or object and an independently given pattern or set of functional requirements."-- Stephen C. Meyer in Evidence for Design in Physics and Biology: From the Origin of the Universe to the Origin of Life
"For a pattern to count as a specification, the important thing is not when it was identified but whether in a certain well-defined sense it is independent of the event it describes."--Wm Dembski pg 15 NFL
"Biological specification always refers to function. An organism is a functional system comprising many functional subsystems. In virtue of their function, these systems embody patterns that are objectively given and can be identified independently of the systems that embody them. Hence these systems are specified in the same sense required by the complexity-specification criterion (see sections 1.3 and 2.5). The specification of organisms can be crashed out in any number of ways. Arno Wouters cashes it out globally in terms of the viability of whole organisms. Michael Behe cashes it out in terms of minimal function of biochemical systems."- Wm. Dembski page 148 of NFL
"Dembski (2002) has used the term “complex specified information” (CSI) as a synonym for “specified complexity” to help distinguish functional biological information from mere Shannon information--that is, specified complexity from mere complexity. This review will use this term as well."--Stephen C. Meyer in The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories"
"If it is shannon information, not algorithmically compressible, and can be processed by an information processor into a separate functional system, then it is complex specified information."--CJYman
The complexity limit is set to 500 bits. That is all specified information of 500 bits or more can be safely inferred to be from an intelligent source.
(That some people refuse to understand those concepts is not a refutation of them.)