Friday, September 9, 2011

IDiots are dysfunctional

Nick Matzke asked:

"Even under an ID hypothesis, plant carnivory ought to have some function, right?"

To which joe-boi answered:
September 9, 2011 at 6:29 pm

Under the ID hypothesis plant carnivory has two functions in one- to help keep insect population growth in check and to increase nutrients in nutrient poor conditions.

And to which scott andrews answered:
September 9, 2011 at 6:40 pm

Even under an ID hypothesis, plant carnivory ought to have some function, right?

Does everything that has ever been designed have a function?
If a thing was designed for a function, is that function always instantly apparent? If you found a pencil eraser but had never seen a pencil, would you start looking for the pencil eraser plant?
Is not knowing the function of something a solid basis for determining whether it was designed, or could it be an argument from ignorance?

The answer to your question is in there somewhere.


Let's see some IDiots answer those questions, scott!

Function, and the alleged obvious design of the function, are at the very foundation of the so-called 'ID theory/inference'. In other words, IDiots rely on "function" as one of the fundamental parts of 'ID theory'. You have seen the terms FSCI, FSCI/O, and dFSCI, haven't you? The "F" in them stands for functionally.

FSCI = functionally specific complex information
FSCI/O = functionally specific complex information/organization(?)
dFSCI = digital functionally specific complex information

Take a look at this page...

...and see how many times gordo uses and relies upon the words function, functional, functionally.

And on that page he says: "Indeed, this FSCI perspective lies at the foundation of information theory..."


Hey joe-boi, let's see how you used the "ID hypothesis" (in a scientific, detailed way of course) to come to your conclusion about the functions of plant carnivory.