Comments on: Coffee!: Here’s an interesting design inference re a historic photo

By: Mung

Mung — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:56:40 +0000

If there is one thing I despise about people, it is the inability to acknowledge they were wrong.

This isn’t to say that I despise Denyse, but I do not hesitate to “despise” her “conclusions.”

I suspect that the whole system you seem to speak for is in ruins, except for what you can do through the courts and alarmist pundits.

ID is in RUINS! You heard it first from Denyse O’Leary.

Time to celebrate your victory, Denyse.

By: Mung

Mung — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:06:56 +0000

Denyse, have you had your coffee yet?

By: O'Leary

O'Leary — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:27:58 +0000

Mung at 9: I have no reason whatever to believe that design detection cannot be applied to biology, now that I am reading Signature in the Cell.

I suspect that the whole system you seem to speak for is in ruins, except for what you can do through the courts and alarmist pundits.

By: Mung

Mung — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:37:04 +0000

Granted, design detection is a valid science, but not when applied to biology!

After all, photographs are not self-replicating (neither are photographers, for that matter).

By: johnnyb

johnnyb — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:57:21 +0000

“Would this also therefore apply to the newsreel footage of Gen. Douglas MacArthur…I ask because the footage was entirely staged; indeed, one can find the “blooper” reel in which the landing was repeated multiple times, until MacArthur was satisfied that they “got it right”.”

Absolutely! It’s great that you are now actively applying the design inference! You detected an independent pattern (the blooper real), and then inferred that the chance that these could were multiple, separate events was negligible, and therefore that this was staged.

So, the question is, if this is a standard and obvious way of evaluating patterns, why is it not applicable to biology?

By: O'Leary

O'Leary — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:44:09 +0000

Voice Coil, deception is as form of design, and the universe looks like an artifact to me, as to most peoople, hence a design inference there too.

By: Voice Coil

Voice Coil — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:30:15 +0000

Of course, all photographs are human artifacts, and therefore no inference is required to determine that this photo too is an artifact. Indeed, “fallen soldier” itself differs in no important way from any other photo – the shutter was opened and this was the image captured. The inferences that count in this instance concern the truthfulness of the statements made about the photograph and the circumstances in which the image was collected. We infer not design (or the lack thereof), but rather we infer deception.

By: O'Leary

O'Leary — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:15:49 +0000

Thanks for the update on pre-computer ways of faking a photo, Voice Coil. The fact that it sure looked like the same clouds attracted attention, as when - in some photos of war scenes in the Middle East, some stuff just didn't make sense. Reuters bought doctored stuff for quite a while before the penny dropped, as have other news outlets. When I make a design inference, I don't necessarily know how they did it, just like I don't necessarily know how lotto scams work, I just know that chance doesn't make sense in this case.

By: Allen_MacNeill

Allen_MacNeill — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:53:25 +0000

In other words, what “design inference” would one draw from the newsreel footage of Gen. MacArthur’s “return” to the Phillipines and the Marine’s flag-raising on Iwo Jima?

By: Allen_MacNeill

Allen_MacNeill — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:51:50 +0000

Would this also therefore apply to the newsreel footage of Gen. Douglas MacArthur stepping out of a landing boat and wading ashore in the Phillipines? This footage was shown repeatedly worldwide and was used to support MacArthur’s famous quote “I have…returned”, which ultimately marked the turn of the tide in the southern Pacific.

I ask because the footage was entirely staged; indeed, one can find the “blooper” reel in which the landing was repeated multiple times, until MacArthur was satisfied that they “got it right”.

And, does it apply to the most famous photo from WWII, the Marines raising the flag on Mount Suribachi at Iwo Jima?