Erik Pratt (blipey) with Ignorance Exposed, Exposes More Ignorance

-
OK so Erik Pratt- aka blipey the clown, is ignorant of the fact that dictionary definitions contain information.

Yeah, I know, but what can you expect from an evotard.

In the post Measuring Information/ specified complexity I used the definition of an aarvark as an example of how to measure specified information to see if complex specified information is present.

Erik cannot grasp such a simple concept, thinks he can argue from ignorance and actually thinks he can win an argument with his ignorance.

So I had to ask:

The definition I provided is an example of specified information.

I then measured the information contained in that definition.

It was an EXAMPLE of how to measure SI to see if CSI is present.

Yes or no- do you understand that?

Erik's response:

I understand that you counted the bits in a definition and claimed that this was the same as the information content of the thing that was defined.

It was a "yes or no" question Erik.

But that is moot because now Erik is flat out lying- I never claimed the definition of an object was the same as its information content. Never.

So what gives?

Either you are so ignorant you are incapable of learning or you are so dishonest that you have nothing but lies to help you in your "debate".

Which is it?