Intelligent Reasoning

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

Sunday, November 25, 2018

Joe Felsenstein is Totally Clueless

Back in March of 2012 Joe Felsenstein had a post that supposed to refute the claim that natural selection could not put CSI in the genome.: Natural selection can put Functional Information into the genome.

However the essay doesn't even address CSI/ functional information. He talks about gene distribution whereas CSI/ functional information refers to the genes themselves.

In “Signature in the Cell” Meyer defines “information” basically as it is found in standard and accepted dictionaries:
the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (such as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects
His wording may be slightly different as I pulled that from Merriam-Webster. Both Meyer and Dembski also reference the not-so knightly Francis Crick:
Information means here the precise determination of sequence, either of bases in the nucleic acid or on amino acid residues in the protein.
Durston, et al’s Functional Sequence Complexity appears to follow the same definitions. Their measure corresponds to distinct proteins and not their distribution within a population.
In “No Free Lunch” William brings up “discrete combinatorial objects” in reference to irreducible complex biological structures. One of his 3 parts of a DCO is the origin of the parts, which would be the proteins of say ATP synthase. Those proteins are coded for in the DNA.
The other two parts of the DCO equation are the getting the parts to the right place (at the right time) , ie the localization issue and properly assembling them into the functional unit, ie the configuration issue.
One thing that stands out is the holistic nature of what is being discussed. It is more than just getting the words of “METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL”. You need the sentence or you get nothing but a “you tried”.

There isn't anything in the ID literature that supports Joe Felsenstein' s (mis)representation of CSI. Clearly Joe Felsenstein is quite content to argue from ignorance.


Post a Comment

<< Home