Good video on creationist use of "information theory"

[James Brown]

But when rhutchin says 'mutations cannot increase complexity,' for example, he has no coherent definition of the word, making his objection meaningless.

Unless you're responding to criticisms about the available cargo space in Noah's Ark. Then you're more than willing to concede that mutations can easily increase complexity, so much so that a single "kind" of crow placed in a cage by Noah himself can evolve into the 42 recognized extant species of crows we find today. That's a new species emerging approximately every 142 years.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But when rhutchin says 'mutations cannot increase complexity,' for example, he has no coherent definition of the word, making his objection meaningless.

Unless you're responding to criticisms about the available cargo space in Noah's Ark. Then you're more than willing to concede that mutations can easily increase complexity, so much so that a single "kind" of crow placed in a cage by Noah himself can evolve into the 42 recognized extant species of crows we find today. That's a new species emerging approximately every 142 years.

No, no. Rhutchin's convinced that science shows that the crow 'kind' had the potential for all the 42 crow species today. Kind of like a 2-ton block of granite contains a sculpture of Moses. You just chip away everything that's not a 1-ton sculpture of Moses, because mutations only reduce the DNA content. You can't gain complexity by taking things away.

Even by carving a six-side die into a smaller 12-sided die, you've still only got a die. No increase on complexity. Sure, you can get twice as many results from rolling it, but that's not complexity. Because it's not.

 

[Kharakov]

Yeah. After billions of years of evolution, the first button was struck. After this, it was only a matter of time before someone figured out the secret.

Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort, and you might not be satisfied with treating someone like a toaster. When the button strikes back, the button strikes for you (Soviet Russia jokes fit nicely into the button theme).

 

[Malintent]

Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort

"Simplicity" (or "complexity", as usually stated), and "elegance" are subjective and therefore fairly useless terms in science.

Can you explain how the invention of the paperclip fits your statement? Simple as all hell... elegantly functional.. a wire bent in 3 places... no great care nor effort.

Some things take alot of effort and some things do not.
Some things are complex and some are not
The correlation is not as strong as I suspect you think it is (or HAS to be.. just HAS to)

 

[Kharakov]

Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort

"Simplicity" (or "complexity", as usually stated), and "elegance" are subjective and therefore fairly useless terms in science.

Can you explain how the invention of the paperclip fits your statement? Simple as all hell... elegantly functional.. a wire bent in 3 places... no great care nor effort.

What the hell are you talking about? You think the technology, mines, resources, etc. that went into making the wire that paper clips are formed out of did not take great care and effort?

I'm not even touching on balancing out the fundamental forces in such a way that they allow complex structures to be formed.

 

[Malintent]

"Simplicity" (or "complexity", as usually stated), and "elegance" are subjective and therefore fairly useless terms in science.

Can you explain how the invention of the paperclip fits your statement? Simple as all hell... elegantly functional.. a wire bent in 3 places... no great care nor effort.

What the hell are you talking about? You think the technology, mines, resources, etc. that went into making the wire that paper clips are formed out of did not take great care and effort?

I'm not even touching on balancing out the fundamental forces in such a way that they allow complex structures to be formed.

You are sliding down a slippery slope of infinite regression

The design of the paperclip did not remotely involve the design of mining operations, metal refinement, forging, or even manufarcturing processes that involve the bending of wire.. etc... The metal wire already existed for an entierly different purpose. The sope of the development of the metal wire is completely irrelevent in the discussion of the complete lack of effort involved in the elegant solution that is the paperclip.

.. and I am positive you know that but are grasping at straw(men) to feel "right" about something as obviously and demonstratively untrue as 'complexity requires thoughtful design".

 

[Kharakov]

What the hell are you talking about? You think the technology, mines, resources, etc. that went into making the wire that paper clips are formed out of did not take great care and effort.

The design of the paperclip did not remotely involve the design of mining operations, metal refinement, forging, or even manufarcturing processes that involve the bending of wire.. etc... The metal wire already existed for an entierly different purpose. The sope of the development of the metal wire is completely irrelevent in the discussion of the complete lack of effort involved in the elegant solution that is the paperclip.

Yeah. Why don't you go to a bar in a mining town and tell the workers that their care and effort did not contribute to the making of what they made or what was made with it. Say it loud. Make sure you tell every scientist who by studious effort contributes to the good that is available to humanity, that their studies did not take any effort. Say it loud.

You're going to have to tell 1000s of professions, all of whom have contributed in some way or another to the support of other professions, that they didn't contribute anything as well. Say it loud.

I dare you to walk into a factory bar, after a work shift, and tell the workers that they didn't put any effort into what they did. I fucking dare you to go and insult an old mine worker, in front of his sons, and say that the effort he put in didn't contribute to the making of the paper clip. Might be easier to go to a union meeting in Pittsburgh though. They definitely will appreciate what you say.

Plenty of people to tell that their efforts didn't contribute. A whole bunch of them. You really want to do this? I think it's a bad idea.

 

[Malintent]

The design of the paperclip did not remotely involve the design of mining operations, metal refinement, forging, or even manufarcturing processes that involve the bending of wire.. etc... The metal wire already existed for an entierly different purpose. The sope of the development of the metal wire is completely irrelevent in the discussion of the complete lack of effort involved in the elegant solution that is the paperclip.

Yeah. Why don't you go to a bar in a mining town and tell the workers that their care and effort did not contribute to the making of what they made or what was made with it. Say it loud. Make sure you tell every scientist who by studious effort contributes to the good that is available to humanity, that their studies did not take any effort. Say it loud.

You're going to have to tell 1000s of professions, all of whom have contributed in some way or another to the support of other professions, that they didn't contribute anything as well. Say it loud.

I dare you to walk into a factory bar, after a work shift, and tell the workers that they didn't put any effort into what they did. I fucking dare you to go and insult an old mine worker, in front of his sons, and say that the effort he put in didn't contribute to the making of the paper clip. Might be easier to go to a union meeting in Pittsburgh though. They definitely will appreciate what you say.

Plenty of people to tell that their efforts didn't contribute. A whole bunch of them. You really want to do this? I think it's a bad idea.

goalpost shifting (grasping for a foothold as you slip down the slope).

In the first sentense of your response you conflate "contributes to" with "was panned for".

You go into that hypothetical mining town and ask them if they are happy knowing that all their life-long effort was intentended to accomplish was the making of a paperclip. Not steel ships, girders for bridges, or life-saving structures and devices... no... the paperclip was what mining, refining, and forging was and is all about.

You should proofread your responses and think about what you are trying to say.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Did any of those miners create the paperclip?
Any of the factory workers?
The truck drivers in shipping?
The forklift drivers that put crates of paperclips on the trucks?
How are any of these people part of the discussion about the invention of the paperclip?
They're part of the development of the creation and distribution process of paperclips. Not the invention of hte paperclip.

I don't think Kharrie's shifting a goalpost, i think he's moved to an entirely different league.

 

[Kharakov]

A lot of effort has gone into acquiring and creating the resources that make creating a paper clip easy. It's like you or I not having to set up the whole damn internet just to have a conversation. And the internet needed the backbone of the railways to create commerce, etc. etc.

We (the people at the end of the road) didn't have to set up foundries, experiment with different alloys, or do various things that have allegedly taken mankind 1000s of years to perfect.

Here is a quote for you from the Office Museum (Paper Clips):

"According to Petroski, "Steel wire was still new in the second half of the nineteenth century....[T]he widespread manufacture and use of the paper clip had to await not only the availability of the right wire but also the existence of machinery capable of tirelessly and reliably bending it in a flash into things that could be bought for pennies a box." (Henry Petroski, "From Pins to Paper Clips," The Evolution of Useful Things, Vintage, New York, 1992, p. 60)"


The both of you already believe that 1000s of years of effort have resulted in the infrastructure, technology, arts, and entertainment we have today. So claiming that the prior efforts of humanity are not part of what exists today, when you obviously believe man created everything sans God, is a bit of a stretch (it would be a stretch even for pathological liars, which none of us are).

I'm just a cave man, your cars with their honking horns frighten me, yet I wrote the original "Angry Birds" 12,000 years ago.. and it took you slackers 12000 years to create a smartphone that the app could work on. Slackers I tell ya. Each and every one. 12000 years for a smartphone? When I was clubbing your great*8*10^2 grandmother over the head, the day I got her pregnant, I didn't imagine that you punk kids would say that it didn't take an effort to get you were you are today, and I certainly didn't imagine it would take 12000 fucking years. Slackers.


On a side note. We are now arguing about paper clips. This is fucking hilarious.

 

[The Paul]

On a side note. We are now arguing about paper clips. This is fucking hilarious.

Maybe that's something of a surprise to you...

I, for one, have been around long enough to witness multiple examples of somebody showing up and saying something trivial and obvious, (Like, say, "it wouldn't have been possible to invent the paper-clip if the materials used to make paperclips weren't already available"), get all pouty because no one gives a shit about their "brilliant insight", and then start using a combination of goalpost-shifting and abuse of English to attach ever-greater meaning and consequence to their statement in a misguided attempt to appear sage.

It often results in arguments over trivial shit like paperclips.

 

[Kharakov]

On a side note. We are now arguing about paper clips. This is fucking hilarious.

Maybe that's something of a surprise to you...

It often results in arguments over trivial shit like paperclips.

So it wasn't obvious that that was a joke?

I, for one, have been around long enough to witness multiple examples of somebody showing up and saying something trivial and obvious, (Like, say, "it wouldn't have been possible to invent the paper-clip if the materials used to make paperclips weren't already available"), get all pouty because no one gives a shit about their "brilliant insight", and then start using a combination of goalpost-shifting and abuse of English to attach ever-greater meaning and consequence to their statement in a misguided attempt to appear sage.

This is where it came from (must have forgot to paperclip the memos to the rest of the memos):

After billions of years of evolution, the first button was struck. ...
Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort...

The time frame may be off by a few orders of magnitude. It's not relevant to the point.

The point being very simple, and yes, obvious.

A lot of our technology is the result of great care and effort. Hitting a button and getting a spectacular result (look- pictures from the other side of the globe!) isn't the result of the person hitting the button. It's the result of all of the work that went into setting up the device that was turned on by the button.

And yes, as you put it, it is trivial and obvious information. Yet read the following:

After billions of years of evolution, the first button was struck. ...
Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort...

Can you explain how the invention of the paperclip fits your statement? Simple as all hell... elegantly functional.. a wire bent in 3 places... no great care nor effort.

What the hell are you talking about? You think the technology, mines, resources, etc. that went into making the wire that paper clips are formed out of did not take great care and effort?

To which Malintent interjected the following:

The design of the paperclip did not remotely involve the design of mining operations, metal refinement, forging, or even manufarcturing processes that involve the bending of wire.. etc... The metal wire already existed for an entierly different purpose. The sope of the development of the metal wire is completely irrelevent in the discussion of the complete lack of effort involved in the elegant solution that is the paperclip.

Which completely misses the point, which is that the things that are easy today (pressing a button, or inventing a paper clip) are easy due to the great effort and care that preceded the easy button push.

Not to mention this gem (that's a paperclip pun for those of you who aren't yet aware of the history of paperclips):

.. and I am positive you know that but are grasping at straw(men) to feel "right" about something as obviously and demonstratively untrue as 'complexity requires thoughtful design".

Which is not what I was talking about: "Simplicity and elegance of design require great care and effort" which was said in reference to someone being able to push a button and achieve a result.

Ask yourself this: Did Kharakhead really switch the goalposts, or did you, Keith, and Malintent go chasing after some imaginary goalpost and blame me for it being too far away?

"The goalpost" that I originally mentioned is something that all 3 of you would agree to, because, like you said, it's trivial and obvious. It takes great effort to miss something as obvious as what I said. It's like looking at a sign that says enter here, and walking into a wall.

Would you blame me for expecting a disingenuous response?

 

[bigfield]

You seem to be forgetting something.

Someone had to invent a goal-based sport before you could engage in these logical fallacies.

Think about that.

 

[Keith&Co.]

You seem to be forgetting something.

Someone had to invent a goal-based sport before you could engage in these logical fallacies.

Think about that.

No, no ,the behavior would exist and would be fallacious whether or not there's a humorous sports metaphor readily at hand to label the fallacy with. But like math, it's just something humans have invented, and found a way to use it to understand the universe.

 

[Malintent]

A lot of effort has gone into acquiring and creating the resources that make creating a paper clip easy. It's like you or I not having to set up the whole damn internet just to have a conversation. And the internet needed the backbone of the railways to create commerce, etc. etc.

We (the people at the end of the road) didn't have to set up foundries, experiment with different alloys, or do various things that have allegedly taken mankind 1000s of years to perfect.

Here is a quote for you from the Office Museum (Paper Clips):

"According to Petroski, "Steel wire was still new in the second half of the nineteenth century....[T]he widespread manufacture and use of the paper clip had to await not only the availability of the right wire but also the existence of machinery capable of tirelessly and reliably bending it in a flash into things that could be bought for pennies a box." (Henry Petroski, "From Pins to Paper Clips," The Evolution of Useful Things, Vintage, New York, 1992, p. 60)"


The both of you already believe that 1000s of years of effort have resulted in the infrastructure, technology, arts, and entertainment we have today. So claiming that the prior efforts of humanity are not part of what exists today, when you obviously believe man created everything sans God, is a bit of a stretch (it would be a stretch even for pathological liars, which none of us are).

I'm just a cave man, your cars with their honking horns frighten me, yet I wrote the original "Angry Birds" 12,000 years ago.. and it took you slackers 12000 years to create a smartphone that the app could work on. Slackers I tell ya. Each and every one. 12000 years for a smartphone? When I was clubbing your great*8*10^2 grandmother over the head, the day I got her pregnant, I didn't imagine that you punk kids would say that it didn't take an effort to get you were you are today, and I certainly didn't imagine it would take 12000 fucking years. Slackers.


On a side note. We are now arguing about paper clips. This is fucking hilarious.

Nothing in this post has anyhitng to do with the "elegant designing of the paperclip". That "the paperclip had to wait for the invention of the wire" is a figure of speach...like water "wanting" to run down hill. Water does not want and the papercip designers were not all sitting around hopeing someone would invent the thing they need to invent the thing they want.

Yes, we stand on the shoulders of giants. Nothing is done "from scratch", so to speak. I can send you an email without setting up a new internet, and the inventors of internet email did need for the internet to exist before they could create internet email (gonna nit pic this myself in a sec, hold on*). This has absolutely nothig at all to do with the effort (or lack thereof) of building the thing that is sitting on those shoulders.

* email was invented to send messages between users on a single, shared computer. It was expanded, of course, to utilize whatever infrastructure existed at the time (pre-internet).

 

[Kharakov]

You seem to be forgetting something.

Someone had to invent a goal-based sport before you could engage in these logical fallacies.

Think about that.

No, no ,the behavior would exist and would be fallacious whether or not there's a humorous sports metaphor readily at hand to label the fallacy with. But like math, it's just something humans have invented, and found a way to use it to understand the universe.

So you'd still make false claims that another was engaging in fallacious behaviors whether or not you could use a sports metaphor? I don't think it would be nearly as entertaining.

 

[Malintent]

I'm just a cave man, your cars with their honking horns frighten me, yet I wrote the original "Angry Birds" 12,000 years ago.. and it took you slackers 12000 years to create a smartphone that the app could work on. Slackers I tell ya. Each and every one. 12000 years for a smartphone? When I was clubbing your great*8*10^2 grandmother over the head, the day I got her pregnant, I didn't imagine that you punk kids would say that it didn't take an effort to get you were you are today, and I certainly didn't imagine it would take 12000 fucking years. Slackers.

Wait I just noticed this... This is an amusing story that illustrates well the stupidity of the notion that "the paperclip is complex and elegant and needed lots of work to develop because mining, forging,etc..".. you appear to be mocking yourself. Confused.

 

[Kharakov]

Yes, we stand on the shoulders of giants. Nothing is done "from scratch", so to speak.

Yeah! That's all I was saying. That the ease of what we do today is due to tremendous effort and care. That's all. Now, whether I take this in a direction that you will disagree with is going to have to wait until after my run. It's already hot as fuck outside, and I want to get a short 5 mile run in before it gets too hot.

* email was invented to send messages between users on a single, shared computer. It was expanded, of course, to utilize whatever infrastructure existed at the time (pre-internet).

Darpanet and Telenet (not telnet). I remember it. Luckily for me, I lived in a university town in the 80s.

 

[Malintent]

On a side note. We are now arguing about paper clips. This is fucking hilarious.

Maybe that's something of a surprise to you...

I, for one, have been around long enough to witness multiple examples of somebody showing up and saying something trivial and obvious, (Like, say, "it wouldn't have been possible to invent the paper-clip if the materials used to make paperclips weren't already available"), get all pouty because no one gives a shit about their "brilliant insight", and then start using a combination of goalpost-shifting and abuse of English to attach ever-greater meaning and consequence to their statement in a misguided attempt to appear sage.

It often results in arguments over trivial shit like paperclips.

Good response. However we are talking about "paperclips" because the prevelant existance of paperclips that everyone is familiar with disproves this posters assertions that elegant designs require complex and focused effort. So, we are not really talking about "paperclips", we are talking about what is requeired for complexity.. and concerted effort and focused inteligent planning is (obviously) not a requierment.

 

[Malintent]

Yeah! That's all I was saying. That the ease of what we do today is due to tremendous effort and care. That's all. Now, whether I take this in a direction that you will disagree with is going to have to wait until after my run. It's already hot as fuck outside, and I want to get a short 5 mile run in before it gets too hot.

* email was invented to send messages between users on a single, shared computer. It was expanded, of course, to utilize whatever infrastructure existed at the time (pre-internet).

Darpanet and Telenet (not telnet). I remember it. Luckily for me, I lived in a university town in the 80s.

OK then, we are now talking about infinite regression. This argument isn't about "what makes things easier than impossible" (the answer, by the way, is Language). This argument seems more about, "you couldn't have accompished "X" unless "Y" was there... and Y without Z... etc, ad nausium.