> I am still curious how you intend to separate apparant from actual CSI
> though. Wesley's algorithm room still remains a formidable 'riddle'
No, it isn't. CSI is CSI.
Here's a thought experiment.
We find a wall with a little door in it. Occasionally, that door opens,
and small complex artifacts emerge. Maybe these are sonnets, or
pencils, or integrated circuits, or plaster busts of Mozart -- whatever.
So eventually our curiosity gets the better of us, and we carefully
cut an opening in the wall to discover what's behind it.
In that room, we find a large machine. On analysis, we find that
the machine is programmed to produce sonnets, pencils, integrated
circuits, and busts of Mozart, as well as thousands of other artifacts.
The machine then opens the door in the wall and deposits these
artifacts in the outside world.
Gosh, we say -- no more problem of the origin of CSI! Obviously,
a mindless algorithm is outputting CSI, namely, this machine here.
And we got off to have a beer, happy that we've solved the
puzzle of CSI. CSI is only "apparent," because it's being produced
by a large machine.
;-)
OK, that's *really* my last post in this thread (although I still
owe Wes a reply on natural selection).
Paul Nelson
Senior Fellow
The Discovery Institute
www.discovery.org/crsc
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 12:25:27 EDT