Title Author Date

Regarding Harun Yahya Chughtai , Mobeen Jun 03, 2006

Hello There.

I'm a citizen of Pakistan; I am a communist. Now while I am not sure about your stance on the latter, i just wanted to thank you for the
excellent critique you have drafted of the assertions presented by Harun Yahya.

I am in the process of dealing with Islamo-Fascists at this time. The debate, as it stands, will soon come to a head with me defending a Scientific-Material interpretation of History while they will present the
case, as it is presented, by Harun Yahya.

Again, i just wanted to thank you and request permission to cite your article in my debate.

Best Regards,

Mobeen Chughtai.
Pakistan.

read replies (1)
write a reply

Title Author Date

Your book Korthof, Gert May 14, 2006

Dear Mark,

After reading Dembski's exposition about complexity and information content,
your perceptive observation about the complexity of pebbles and billiard balls, which I found in
your book 'Unintelligent Design', was a great eye-opener for me.
I think it is an important observation and therefore I included it in my Dembksi review:
http://home.planet.nl/~gkorthof/kortho44.htm

Furthermore, I included the same illustration in a lecture for biology students of
Groningen University on 10 May this year.

All the best
Gert Korthof

read replies (1)
write a reply Related Article(s):
New Book Is Available

Title Author Date

Complexified Specificity Eriksen, Poul Willy May 14, 2006

Hi!

While Perakh's article "A Free Lumch in a Mousetrap" is in general an excellent article, it has an important - but understandable - flaw, more precisely a misunderstand of Dembski's argument.

It's in section 6, "Is complexity equivalent to low probability?". Perakh concludes with using flat, triangular snow crystals as an example
that the answer is no. But here Perakh unfortunately forgets that in Dembski-land words don't necessarily have their usual meaning. The word "complexity" in "specified complexity" means "statistical complexity", which in turn means "low probability". So, it isn't that "complexity necessarily *translates* into low probability", it is that "complexity *is* low probability".

Actually, a specification is the better, the simpler it is. Think about poker. A "Royal Flush" is a simple description compared to, say, "ten of Diamonds, two and five of Hearts, King of Spades, and seven of Clubs". However, there are four different Royal Flushes, but only one of the latter hand, so a Royal Flush actually has the higher probability of these two.
It's just that in poker "ten to Ace of the same suite", aka a "Royal Flush", has a special significance, whereas "ten of Diamonds, two and five of Hearts, King of Spades, and seven of Clubs" doesn't. A specification is a simple pattern, the simpler the name, and even names count! If someone was to cheat in poker, would you expert that one to "design" a Royal Flush
or "ten of Diamonds, two and five of Hearts, King of Spades, and seven of Clubs"?

So, according to Dembski, a design inference is warranted, not when we have something that has a low probability (the "complexity" part) and at
the same time a simple, recognizable pattern (the "specified") part.

In Dembski-land "snow crystal" is simple than "flat, triangular snow crystal", because the first uses only two words, while the second uses four words. Remember, somebody makes the design inference, so it's up to the semiotic capabilities of that somebody, what's designed or not!

Best regards and keep up the good work :-)

Poul Willy Eriksen

read replies (1)
write a reply Related Article(s):
A Free Lunch in a Mousetrap

Title Author Date

Query about biblical prophecies in relation to "talk reason" David, Andie Baruch May 10, 2006

How do you interpret the numerous referances in the Torah for "prophecies" such as the jewish return to Israel. This is often used as prime evidence for Gods providence in outreach and does appear very "reasonable". The whole
chain of events that took place leading to state modern israel does deam to be amazing ?

How doe you "miminalize" this ?

Andie

read replies (2)
write a reply

Previous | | Next