Re: Irreducible complexity analogs

Jim Bell (70672.1241@CompuServe.COM)
29 Nov 96 11:24:33 EST

I wrote:

>But Bill, trial and error is the very definition of intelligent design.

Bill replied:

<<Did you really say this? >>

Yes, I really said this.

<<Trial and error is
certainly not the very definition of the kind of design an omnipotent,
omniscient God produces.>>

Whoa, hold the phone! I NEVER said that. We were talking about your analog. We
were talking about human intelligence plugged into a system designed with a
goal: product development. That's all.

<< I find this really amazing. You are clutching at
any element of design at all -- even when it's in bits and pieces which
conflict and clash with one another, just so you can say that design is
present in a fairly chaotic example.>>

Your amazement merely proves my point. Human intelligent design is not really
close to the Grand Design after all, is it? That's why I find these analogs so
weak.

<<Are you really Howard Van Till?>>

Yes, as evidenced by my gapless intellectual economy.

Jim