Rich Hughes sent along a diagram of Dembski's explanatory filter. It won't fit on my screen, but PZ Myers redid it and posted it to his blog as well. It's hysterical. Click here.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I've been a bit derelict in my blog reading lately, so I overlooked this post by Wesley Elsberry. His subject is a comment left by William Dembski at his (Dembski's) blog, in response to this post.
Dembski, it seems, now admits that he has been wasting everyone's time for quite a while.
Dembski's…
There's a very interesting article over at Uncommon Descent about beavers, and the things that they do. I'm not entirely sure why they posted the article - Barry seems to be trying to make the point that because Beavers clearly can commit criminal acts but just as clearly can't form criminal…
(Note addendum to this post: the infamous Uncommon Descent memory hole is in operation.)
A while back, Bill Dembski was bragging about how he was going to be snuffling about Baylor University, affiliating himself with an ID research lab there. It was a strange situation: a serious lab working on ID…
Came across this post by Verdon, who has also attempted to answer Dean Esmay on why ID should not be in public schools. His answer sounds much like mine, though I think his is more succinct:
Now, when we look at ID what evidence is there? Well? Having a hard time aren't you. You can't look at the…
Simpler, perhaps easier-to-operate filter here.
I'm hoping Davescot comments in bold about it at (un)common descent. He's dreamy. He's a world class something or other for Dell, dontcha know!
I'm especially amused how they assign probabilities for events to which they have no idea what the relevant probability is, and then give the evolutionists the 'benefit of the doubt' by reducing the meaningless probability to a smaller meaingless probability.
Plus, as oother have noted, they look for the probability of spontaneous generation - no intermediate steps or nasty recursive forces..