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

Thursday, June 25, 2020

Joshua Swamidass- Choking on the Explanatory Filter

Unbelievable. The explanatory filter is nothing more than standard operating procedure for anyone trying to determine then root cause of something. Joshua fucks it up from the get go:
The EF’s logic takes these questions in order.

  1. Is it known natural processes alone? If yes, then conclude not designed.
  2. Is it chance alone? If yes, then conclude not designed.
  3. Conclude design.
Just put it down as Dembski wrote it, Joshua. You fucked it up. Step 2 is NOT just chance alone. Dembski goes over that in his writings. Step 3 requires a SPECIFICATION in order to INFER design.

Steps 1 and 2 do exhaust all blind and mindless processes, i.e. nature operating freely.

For some reason Joshua thinks it's a problem for the EF because it doesn't consider UNKNOWN processes. Earth to Joshua- the science of TODAY does not and canNOT wait for what the science of tomorrow may or may not discover. I mean seriously? That is exactly what makes ID potentially falsifiable. Does Joshua grasp that? Nope.

Next Joshua thinks the EF doesn't consider chance and law at the second box. That is WRONG! The toss of the dice relies on GRAVITY, MOTION and INERTIA, for example. Erosion patterns also depend on water speed, which is driven by gravity. The EF is like a snowball. You keep adding natural processes to try to find out what happened.

Further down Joshua says:
However, it [failing to combine chance and necessity] does justify excluding any realistic model of random mutations (chance) + natural selection (natural process).
Natural selection is nothing more than contingent serendipity. There isn't any realistic model- whatever is good enough to survive and reproduce, does so. Natural selection eliminates the less fit, within a population, over time. It's not creative and it isn't magical. The pandemic is a great example of NS. The best that can come of it is a fitter population because the less fit have been culled. Still very much human. 

So no, the EF doesn't exclude NS. No one has shown NS has any power to produce the appearance of design.

But anyway, the explanatory filter. The way it is set up is a flow chart consisting of the start, followed by 3 decision boxes. Wm. Dembski explains it here.

You start with whatever it is you are investigating. You are investigating because you want to know how something came to be the way it is, what it is and what it does.

You start out looking for natural, ie non ARTIFICIAL, processes that can account for it. This is also per Sir Isaac Newton's 4 Rules of Scientific Reasoning. Note that Newton's "natural" was contrasted against God's supernatural. Meaning artificial, to Newton, would still be under the natural umbrella.

Joshua says
I infer that Mt. Everest is designed, because God created all things.
The issue is was God's intervention required or not? Just because the earth was intelligently designed doesn't mean every existing feature was. Things change, naturally.

So no, God didn't Create all things the way they are now.


Post a Comment

<< Home