Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Friday, February 26, 2010

Specification- the Difference maker

-
Evotards continue to crack me up.

Out of one side of their ass they say that IDists bashing the theory of evolution does not promote ID- IOW bashing their theory does not provide positive evidence for ID.

But when one looks at what those same evotards are doing- they are bashing ID- cluelessly bashing ID at that- as opposed to providing postive evidence for their brand of nonsense.

Which brings us to "specification"- the difference maker.

In my previous post I exposed Gary Hurd's mumbled thinking just by presenting the very thing he misrepresented- explanatory filter.

Upon reaching the final decision node we see "Specified", meaning does some specification exist?


What does specification refer to?

As Dr Behe put it in "Darwin's Black Box":
"Our ability to be confident of the design of the cilium or intracellular transport rests on the same principles to be confident of the design of anything: the ordering of separate components to achieve an identifiable function that depends sharply on the components.”

And we also have:
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


and:
"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

and:
"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


Put all that together with the fact that we humans have been engaged in design detection of many types for as long as anyone can remember- forensic science relies on our ability to differentiate between agency involvement and nature, operating freely. Anthropology/ archaeology also relies on that ability.

The difference between a rock and artifact is specification.

Also by reaching that final decision node the thing under investigation meets the complexity criteria based on probabilities.

So the design inference means that the thing in question is both complex and specified.

IOW we could eliminate chance and necessity- to the best of our ability- but if we do not observe any specification design would not be inferred- a hanging chad of science->the unexplained anomaly.

And that alone means that design is not the default after chance and necessity have been eliminated.



What's the point of all of this?

Evotards are having mental issues with "specification".

It's as if they think we cannot detect design unless there is/ was a qualified scientist there to observe it as it happens.

Yet reality refutes that tarded PoV.

Go figure...

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home