Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bilboe · 05-09-2002, 06:19 PM

I've been wondering for a while, now: Is it "the yeti" or "they eti"? Anyway, I found a way to contact Denton and e-mailed him about all this. With any luck he might answer, and then we'll know whether he thinks he's repudiated himself. Of course, this won't necessarily settle the issue. Even if he denies repudiating himself, we still might think he did. Likewise, even if he admits repudiating himself, we still might think he didn't.

Quetzal · 05-10-2002, 12:53 AM

Great Bilboe! I hope you hear from him. I'd be very interested in a reply "from the horse's mouth" as it were. All I've been going by is my own interpretation as much as anything else. To me, it sure SOUNDS like he's repudiated his first work. OTOH, if you were an author continuing to get royalties from a book, would you come out publicly and say it was bunk? Hmmmm...

Bilboe · 05-10-2002, 12:52 PM

Morpho,

Good point. I don't even like to admit I'm wrong when I my opinions are free. So far, no answer.

I should add that luckily, I've never been wrong.

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Bilboe ]</p>

hezekiah jones · 05-11-2002, 05:01 PM

A meeting of the greatest of the ID minds:

Nelson, Wells, Dembski, Meyer, Johnson, and Behe discuss Denton's Nature's Destiny.

<a href="http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od192/naturesdestiny192.htm" target="_blank">A Roundtable on Nature's Destiny</a>

Some quote-mining:

Quote:

Behe: That’s a weak argument.

Meyer: I agree with Mike on this.

Behe: Can I jump in for a second?

Nelson: I think you’re probably right.

Behe: I would agree. Here’s an analogy ...

Dembski: Yes, necessary conditions are not sufficient conditions. That’s a real problem with Denton’s argument. Here’s a story from John Earman illustrating the point ...

Meyer: Exactly.

Dembski: But this whole notion of "design by law" turns out to be an unstable equilibrium.

Johnson: I’ll say something about that momentarily ... as the Bible said, the world was created by an intelligent cause.

Nelson: Jonathan, we haven’t heard from you yet.

Wells: OK. Well, I have the advantage of having listened to all of you first.

Johnson: There’s nothing left to do but go to the tavern and play checkers.

Meyer: Exactly.

Wells: I want to endorse pretty much everything Denton has to say about physics, chemistry, and geochemistry ... Then I think his argument goes badly off its track.

Nelson: Why?

Johnson: Then Darwin comes along.

Meyer: Could I say something about that?

Dembski: Having said this, I think there’s a serious confusion in Nature’s Destiny between necessary and sufficient conditions, a confusion related to Denton’s deeper goal of explaining life only in terms of natural regularities. "Creation by law," or "design by law"--that’s what Denton is after. It reminds one of the ideas circulating in the early 19th century. God designed the world, to be sure, only he did so through natural laws. Denton cites the pre-Darwinian teleological evolutionist Robert Chambers favorably, and calls his idea of "directed evolution," as elaborated in Chambers’s Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (1844), "immensely attractive" (p. 272). The idea may be attractive, but I’m afraid it just doesn’t work. Natural regularities, or the necessary physical conditions which Denton discusses, by their very nature cannot generate the specified complexity required for life.

Meyer: Exactly.

Jones: Jesus Christ, he even speaks in footnotes.

Nelson: Could we say that one cannot pack a blue whale into the genome of an archaebacterium?

Wells: Sure.

Jones: "One cannot pack a blue whale into the genome of an archaebacterium."

Dembski: P(X|Y) >= 10^150 <=> P(Y&X) >= P(Y) � 10^150 (since P(Y&X) = P(Y) � P(X|Y)) <=> I(Y&X) <= I(Y) + 500 (taking log2 of both sides).

Meyer: Exactly.

Nelson: rotflmfao.

Johnson: There’s nothing left to do but go to the tavern and play checkers.

Meyer: Exactly.

Nelson: Well, thanks everyone for your reflections.

[ May 11, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiahjones ]</p>

Bilboe · 05-12-2002, 04:11 AM

Hey, Jones, that was a great link. I enjoyed their discussion. But I enjoyed your comments and editing even more. You're truly a great humo(u)rist! And yes, apparently Dembski even talks in footnotes!

Bilboe · 05-12-2002, 03:41 PM

I found this article by Denton:

<a href="http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od192/invertedretina192.htm" target="_blank">http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od192/invertedretina192.htm</a>

I must say, he has me baffled. I have no idea what pigeon-hole to place him in.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-09-2002, 06:19 PM	#21
Bilboe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 54	I've been wondering for a while, now: Is it "the yeti" or "they eti"? Anyway, I found a way to contact Denton and e-mailed him about all this. With any luck he might answer, and then we'll know whether he thinks he's repudiated himself. Of course, this won't necessarily settle the issue. Even if he denies repudiating himself, we still might think he did. Likewise, even if he admits repudiating himself, we still might think he didn't.

05-10-2002, 12:53 AM	#22
Quetzal Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ecuador Posts: 738	Great Bilboe! I hope you hear from him. I'd be very interested in a reply "from the horse's mouth" as it were. All I've been going by is my own interpretation as much as anything else. To me, it sure SOUNDS like he's repudiated his first work. OTOH, if you were an author continuing to get royalties from a book, would you come out publicly and say it was bunk? Hmmmm...

05-10-2002, 12:52 PM	#23
Bilboe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 54	Morpho, Good point. I don't even like to admit I'm wrong when I my opinions are free. So far, no answer. I should add that luckily, I've never been wrong. [ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Bilboe ]</p>

05-12-2002, 04:11 AM	#25
Bilboe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 54	Hey, Jones, that was a great link. I enjoyed their discussion. But I enjoyed your comments and editing even more. You're truly a great humo(u)rist! And yes, apparently Dembski even talks in footnotes!

05-12-2002, 03:41 PM	#26
Bilboe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 54	I found this article by Denton: <a href="http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od192/invertedretina192.htm" target="_blank">http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od192/invertedretina192.htm</a> I must say, he has me baffled. I have no idea what pigeon-hole to place him in.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.