"For Three Years and counting, I have successfully advanced the Information Theory argument for Intelligent Design on Infidels, the world's largest Atheist discussion forum."
Perry S. Marshall, Cosmic Fingerprints.com
Perry S. Marshall is telling porkies - and we have proof!
Over the periods since the thread began, Mr Marshall has offered fewer than 30 postings - less than ONE PER MONTH! (Where he has ignored questions and altered his stance in a thread which currently has over 1200 entries) including many which prove him wrong or expose the errors in his logic. Anyone attempting to debate him on his own site is subject to comment moderation so they can be silenced without recourse to appeal
Don't take our word for it: see for yourself! http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=135497&page=1
Nevertheless, if you need any further proof that Perry is convinced by his own arguments take a look at this:
It is perfectly acceptable to attempt to hypothesize a process by which DNA could have occurred. But to try to sidestep the question of where the information came from is dishonest.
1. The pattern in DNA is a code.
2. All codes we know the origin of are designed.
3. Therefore we have 100% inference that DNA is designed and 0% inference that it is not.
Perry
"For Three Years and counting, I have successfully advanced the Information Theory argument for Intelligent Design on Infidels, the world's largest Atheist discussion forum."
Perry S. Marshall, Cosmic Fingerprints.com
Perry S. Marshall is telling porkies - and we have proof!
Over the periods since the thread began, Mr Marshall has offered fewer than 30 postings - less than ONE PER MONTH! (Where he has ignored questions and altered his stance in a thread which currently has over 1200 entries) including many which prove him wrong or expose the errors in his logic. Anyone attempting to debate him on his own site is subject to comment moderation so they can be silenced without recourse to appeal
Don't take our word for it: see for yourself! http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=135497&page=1
It is perfectly acceptable to attempt to hypothesize a process by which DNA could have occurred. But to try to sidestep the question of where the information came from is dishonest. 1. The pattern in DNA is a code. 2. All codes we know the origin of are designed. 3. Therefore we have 100% inference that DNA is designed and 0% inference that it is not. Perry
That's induction and it's 100% wrong because the initial postion is wrong. Think of it this way:
Premise: All the sheep I have ever seen are white.
Induction: therefore, all sheep are white.
We know that not all sheep are white so this reasoning, while simple, is also wrong.
Very soon you'll be able to see what we're up against so here's what we have planned:
Explaining why science cannot, ever explain "God". Not just the Christian god, but any supernatural being you care to name.
Exploring Perry Marshall's Cosmic Fingerprints website and explaining where Perry has got it disasterously wrong.
Pondering the mystery that is Perry Marshall's ego - why he claims to have beaten more than 30 atheists over a three year period: and hasn't.
Explaining the difference between a theory, hypothesis, conjecture and idea.
Looking at the lies you're being sold as fact on a daily basis.
Showing why science hasn't got all the answers. (Really, that's a good thing!)
Demonstrating how you can spot a hoax, even a good one, when you see it.
Naming and shaming the "scientists" who claim to know better than, well, other scientists.
Explaining why beef in evolution is not actually incompatible with beef in God - and how.
And much, much more.
Come back soon, we'll be right with you!
Your tame fingerpuppets: Marc & Larry.
