Re: Theatrical Review of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

"...I guess I wouldn't believe in anything if not for my lucky astrology mood watch."

Hi Jason

Quote:
Quite honestly, anything which suggests a higher power is at work. Anything.

How about information theory
http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/infotheoryqa.htm

Quote:
The creation of the universe can be scientifically explained by the Big Bang Theory, for example.

The Big Bang Theory explains what happened after the universe was created, it does not explain how it started. The theory stalls a short period before the beginning when all the "laws" of nature cease to exist. This point they call a "singularity." It is a mystery and cannot be explained in scientific terms (according to such lights as Stephen Hawking etc.)

Quote:
See, the issue with the movie (and I'm trying to keep the movie and my personal beliefs separate) is that Stein does not point out those inefficiencies in Darwin's theory.

Not having seen the movie you have me at a disadvantage. However, that said, it is a 90 minute movie the intent of which is to point out the intolerance of the "scientific" community to non-materialist thought.

Quote:
Just because cells are incredibly complex does not mean they could not, 100%, be created on their own.

You are absolutely right, complexity by itself does not prove that they were designed. Does that mean that we should limit our research to material causes only? Or should we investigate all possibilities?

Quote:
No disrespect intended, but that's bullshit. ID sees evidence of design by an intelligent something or other. Be it a person, civilization, omnipotent superbeing...whatever.

And if the universe was started by some "person, civilization, omnipotent superbeing...whatever." should we ignore the facts and pretend otherwise?

Dave, skeptic

Dave (good to put a real name with a screenname)...

Quote:
How about information theory
http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/infotheoryqa.htm

I freely admit to not being science-smart. However, in order to make Information Theory work-as far as I understand it-presupposes there is a superintelligence as the ONLY answer to the question of where information comes from. It sounds a bit like science fiction, but life being planted by aliens sounds just as plausible knowing as little as we do about the universe.

Which leads me to another question: supposing Information Theory is correct and there is a superintelligence at work along the lines of the god construct and "he" is a being outside the story, how does this explain the bible story, in which Jesus is "his" son?

Quote:
Not having seen the movie you have me at a disadvantage. However, that said, it is a 90 minute movie the intent of which is to point out the intolerance of the "scientific" community to non-materialist thought.

Granted. However, as I'm already mentioned, intolerance of the scientific community is given roughly 1/4 of the run time. The rest has nothing to do with it. (And, as I've also said before, if the film had stuck to telling the story of the people supposedly fired from their jobs, there would have been no problem. But it doesn't.)

Quote:
You are absolutely right, complexity by itself does not prove that they were designed. Does that mean that we should limit our research to material causes only? Or should we investigate all possibilities?

All possibilities. I never said people shouldn't be allowed to research or discuss ID. I only said, right now, it has no place in schools. (Add to that, if we're going to investigate the idea of a superintelligence, then let's also investigate the idea of an alien civilization planting the seeds or an inter-dimensional time warp.)

Quote:
And if the universe was started by some "person, civilization, omnipotent superbeing...whatever." should we ignore the facts and pretend otherwise?

Absolutely not. What we have, in this discussion, is a problem of terminology. The superintelligence is being labeled god, a word carrying a whole host of issues. It is associated with religion, with jihad, with hate, intolerance, prejudice, war, superiority...you name it. People have perverted the original intent of the bible to meet their own needs over time to exclude certain groups, to wage war and the like. If we're going to allow ID into the schools, then we have to also allow in the crystal theory or even the aliens. If not, we stick to evolution.

Jason, loving the conversation

Quote:
However, that said, it is a 90 minute movie the intent of which is to point out the intolerance of the "scientific" community to non-materialist thought.

Huh? Are you seriously suggesting that they rewrite the definition and fundamental nature of sceince so that it is no longer empirically based? No more scientific method? I guess they could, but they'd have to rename the term "science" to "religion". And no more scientific human advancement, but we could come up with some great new hymns and prayers that will be sure to convert those with differing unempircal beliefs!

Doh! We don't need a movie to tell us this. Of course science has no tolerance for anything other than the empirical. It's what makes it science! If you start coming up with untestable hypothesis, which of your peers is going to test it? Your priest? How are we supposed to add to the human body of knowledge that way? We'd still be in the stone age, and burning witches at the stake.

My home theater setup wasn't the result of prayer, but painstaking research through the scientific method that has given us enough knowledge of the nature of things to build such wonderous devices. You may hate science, but I bet you darn well enjoy all the benefits its provided you and your family. Not to mention that knowledge in and of itself can be interesting, if not darn right humbling.

Quote:
However, in order to make Information Theory work-as far as I understand it-presupposes there is a superintelligence as the ONLY answer to the question of where information comes from.

Jason FYI: That link the guy posted has nothing to do with "Information Theory". This is a cute intro to real information theory, which has nothing to do with evolution versus whatever: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Tutorials/Info-Theory/

Of course, some religious fundamentalists decided like everything else to use the name as if it sounds "official" for their own made up theory - one which erroneously assumes that complexity and variability cannot increase without an outside "intelligent" creator. Of course this flies in the face of entire scientific disciplines whose sole existence is to observe, explain, and predict increases in complexity within natural systems without any such outside intelligence necessary.

Yes, people can be that gullible. This is why education is power. It can protect you from manipulation.

In my weirdly-wired brain, I can make a connection between the VERY little I know about Information Theory and evolution. But then, I can also connect Information Theory and gasoline, so...

Jason, ready for bed

Hi Jason

I'm enjoying the conversation too.

Quote:
However, in order to make Information Theory work-as far as I understand it-presupposes there is a superintelligence as the ONLY answer to the question of where information comes from.

Information Theory, which grew out of computer studies, is only the study of what information is and where it comes from. Experience (observation and induction) shows information is a product of mind. Information is like this sentence, a collection of arbitrary marks, symbols, or sounds, etc. that convey something other than the material they are made from. For instance, a page in a book has ink marks on paper, but the ink and the paper do not constrain the information that the marks convey. We could put random marks on a piece of paper (drips or scribbles) and they would not convey information. We could also take the information off of the page and put it into radio waves. The information content is neither produced by the matter in which it is conveyed, nor is it dependent on the matter that conveys it.

Quote:
Which leads me to another question: supposing Information Theory is correct and there is a superintelligence at work along the lines of the god construct and "he" is a being outside the story, how does this explain the bible story, in which Jesus is "his" son?

It doesn't. That is why Intelligent Design is not a "religious" position. In principle Intelligent Design theory could recognize an alien-designed-life-on-earth scenario as an explanation. The God and Jesus of the Bible are not part of the theory. Of course, we would then be justified in wondering where the aliens came from...

Quote:
I only said, right now, it has no place in schools.

Would you support teaching some of the known shortcomings of Darwinian evolution that have been acknowledged by evolutionists and documented in scientific journals?

Oh, and we do research aliens planting seeds, the universe as evolving mind, interdimensional time and/or space warps, multiverse (many universe) theories, the Gaia hypothesis (earth as living and aware entity) etc. Anything goes except a "superintelligence" that exists outside of the material time/space continuum.

Quote:
It is associated with religion, with jihad, with hate, intolerance, prejudice, war, superiority...you name it.

I have a lot of difficulty with this sort of statement, both because it is so demonstrably false and because it is a straw man. I could give you a list of atheistic "believers" who have persecuted and killed their own people en masse - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. (look up "democide") and you could write back with a bunch of "religious" believers who had done the same. The truth is that people tend to act "hate, intolerance, prejudice, war, superiority...you name it" no matter which belief system they subscribe to. I think the bigger question is "Why do we believe it is wrong to act with "hate, intolerance, prejudice, war, superiority...you name it?"

Is it because we are, by nature, moral agents? And if we are moral agents, then where does this moral knowledge come from? And how do we explain our almost universal failure to live up to our own moral standards?

Dave

---

[Post edited by dgosse on May 14, 2008 - CDT 3:11 PM]

Quote:
I think the bigger question is "Why do we believe it is wrong to act with "hate, intolerance, prejudice, war, superiority...you name it?"

Dave,

I know I'm skipping everything else you said to fixate on this one part, but my jaw is literally on the ground with this question. I like to think, through our history, we have seen the positives and negatives of acting with malice or out of spite for our fellow human beings. Granted, we're not a perfect civilization-such a thing doesn't exist-and you did hit it on the head: we are moral. What kinds of morals we ascribe to is a different story, but we have some sort of beliefs about how to treat other people.

(As for my connecting generic "evil" with religion, it comes because so much of the world's evil is justified through religion. The bible says this, Allah says that...and so on. It doesn't matter if these are the things religion stands for, religion is being used as justification. And that's what I object to. No one bothers to think faith through to see if it makes sense. To me, most of the time it doesn't.)

Jason, will get back to the rest tomorrow

Hi Skyhawk

Quote:
You may hate science, but I bet you darn well enjoy all the benefits its provided you and your family. Not to mention that knowledge in and of itself can be interesting, if not darn right humbling.

Actually, I have always been fascinated by science and I enjoy its benefits immensely. I don't read my minimum of a couple of books a week to remain ignorant.

Quote:
Huh? Are you seriously suggesting that they rewrite the definition and fundamental nature of sceince so that it is no longer empirically based?

I would like to see science be a little more empirical and less metaphysical. For example
http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/ArticleDetail/tabid/68/id/2655/Default.aspx

Quote:
Of course, some religious fundamentalists decided like everything else to use the name as if it sounds "official" for their own made up theory - one which erroneously assumes that complexity and variability cannot increase without an outside "intelligent" creator. Of course this flies in the face of entire scientific disciplines whose sole existence is to observe, explain, and predict increases in complexity within natural systems without any such outside intelligence necessary.

http://home.planet.nl/~gkorthof/kortho33.htm

Dave

---

[Post edited by dgosse on May 14, 2008 - CDT 4:24 PM]

"intelligent design" is either the ultimate example of "master of the obvious" or a back-door way of re-introducing religious beliefs (any mysticals, not just christianity or other monotheist constructs) into public schools. "intelligent design" has no place in public schools, which are funded by taxpayers' money. the last time i checked, the government didn't take taxes only from religious/obvious people to pay for schools.