From: Josh Bembenek (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 15:15:40 EDT
Thanks for the link to AAAS, I had not seen your response to Dembski before.
I will review the information to refresh myself of the important issues,
from first glance it appears that you cover several points we have been
"For the moment, I'm content to make the point that the "global premise" of
the ID movement -- especially as it is represented by its chief theorist,
Bill Dembski -- is that they have empirical evidence that certain biotic
systems could not have been assembled for the first time without
non-natural, form-conferring interventions by an unidentified, unembodied
-Perhaps it would be useful for me to state that I do not agree that they
have actually given empirical evidence. Certaintly I have seen no
probability values assigned to each subunit of a bacterial flagellum and the
appropriate calculations made, conclusively showing that flagella cannot
evolve and must be created. I do, however, see the approach as a promising
and interesting avenue of inquiry.
"In my evaluation of Dembski's work I have come to the conclusion that his
Explanatory Filter is radically incapable of doing any such thing."
-I need to review the specifics of this claim.
"You understand, of course, that you are now using "design" in a way quite
different from Dembski's most common usage."
-I am not so much concerned with his particular usage as I am in being open
to exploring how his ideas may be fruitfully applied to our understanding of
the universe. I don't wish to limit my sense of design to any particular
semantic definition. I would like to remain open towards detecting and
understanding the true nature of the universe in relation to it being a
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 01 2003 - 15:16:19 EDT