http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....ses_t.html

Hmm, I didn’t write that. Although it is apparent that someone sharing or spoofing my IP did.

“Petron and Guinness”

I drink neither.

IOW as Stephen Meyers, Wm Dembski, et al., have been saying for years- not any DNA sequence will do.

And we know that chemically speaking, any DNA sequence is just as likely as any other.

Oh thank you.

Amen (in my drunken stupor)

I responded to your comments this morning but I think I may have been spam-filtered for too many cards references (or Lebowski references). Perhaps I’ll re-word and repost if it doesn’t show up by tomorrow.

I could also have been moderated for my post’s inanity — I’m definitely not on the strong side of the brain trust in this environment.

Still, I’ll continue to post on occasion…on the off-chance that I might periodically come up with something mildly interesting. :’)

Ken Miller was watching too much Oprah Winfrey, and went out of his way to buy that new age religious philosophy & pop psychology film “The Secret” on DVD – that Orprah’s promoting. After watching it, he now thinks he can alter space and time with “positive thinking”. So, this denial of reality he has, is his actually his attempt to think “positive” and emit “vibrations” into the cosmos to “attract” a universe where Dembski is the loser and he is the winner… and the invisble pink flying wingless hydra unicorns exist only to torment ID-ist (don’t ask.. I’m sleep deprived).

As you can probably sense, I hate that film.

Any sufficiently unlikely pattern will do I think; that’s why I threw in the hand of prime numbers. They are not part of the ‘poker’ pattern, yet they conform to a meaningful arrangement.

Although I’m certain that the hand-of-cards analogy is not without its flaws, my example served to represent Dembski’s specifed complexity far better than Ken Miller’s, which was intended to dismiss the concept altogether. Complex specified information, in my jejune understanding of it, requires not only sufficiently unlikely arrangements, they must also conform to a pattern that includes specificity.

The irony is that in regards to the intelligent design of biological systems, we did indeed create the pattern before it was discovered, so-to-speak. Many of the components of the bacterial flagellum had parallels to our own designs — before we knew what the flagellum looked like. Frankly, this is amazing to me. We can observe that the flagellum is a motor. We (the royal we) invented motors well before their discovery in single-celled organisms.

Had motors (or similar systems) not been invented at the discovery of the bacterial flagellum, we would still be able to recognize it as a propulsion system, and would be using it as the basis for some of our own technology.