Comments on: Intelligent Design From Information Theory?

By: Mark Nelson

Mark Nelson — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:08:11 +0000

>But Gilder is completely full of nonsense. Information
>Theory has nothing to do with cosmogony, really.

Well, you’re right about that! But like a lot of guys, he manages to make a living out of his hot air. I can’t help but be envious of that part.

By: Krisjohn

Krisjohn — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:30:34 +0000

Oo, and he pulls out Hilter! I think the rules of the game are that you lose as soon as you invoke Hilter.

By: Krisjohn

Krisjohn — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:28:02 +0000

I can see why no reputable scientist wanted to debate this twit. I think he’s claiming that it’s impossible for DNA to mutate spontaneously because it contains “too much” information. He claims that information theory “proves” this assertion.

He also uses the same tired old junk about how an eye is too complicated to have evolved.

I think also, as the host notices, he doesn’t understand what the human genome project is.

Ultimately I think Gilder doesn’t understand the difference between compression and a hash. This mis-understanding may well be the basis of his claims that information theory proves the point of “intelligent design”.

By: Heliologue

Heliologue — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 04:05:23 +0000

But Gilder is completely full of nonsense. Information Theory has nothing to do with cosmogony, really.