Just something that popped up in my head right now. Has anybody here who has studied creationism in any depth ever heard of the ''information problem''? What do you think about this matter?
What does 'studying creationsimin in depth' mean? What does 'the information problem' mean in this context?
Creationsim is the belief that the universe and everything in it exists as a result of some divine acts commited by some creator. And that the creator informed people about his acts.
The 'information problem' with cretaionsim is that it relies on lack of information and knowledge because they are the problems; the threat to the existence of creationism as belief in the first place. Hence the invention of 'intelligent design'. If you cannot sell the product with the old marketing routine, you upgrade it.
In a nutshell: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/
To consider "creationism" in the light of today's research and evidence is just ignorant. I have yet to know a creationist who comes close to understanding (or being able to explain) the sciences of evolution. Answers in Genesis church staff mimic scientists by pretending to publish "research" that is summarily shredded by amateurs because professional evolutionary scientists are busy making vaccines and stuff.
However there is research into the broken thoughts that creationists suffer from.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118314
I assume the "problem of information" being talked about here is the problem Creationists say we have if we pretend that DNA is just like computer code in every way. But it's not like computer code. At all. So there is no problem. DNA "adding or subtracting information" (ie DNA getting longer or shorter) happens all the time. It's nothing special.
Lets take a field trip to Ken Ham's bonehead ark encounter/creation museum. I always wanted to see stuffed dinosaurs in cages inside a boat shaped building. Giddyup
(https://images.huffingtonpost.com/2014-07-14-CreationMuseumTriceritops-thumb.jpg)
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/5/1349430993503/rsz_800px-creation_museum_10_2.jpg?width=445&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=56cda84b0412d9f4c88de9dcf11b29bf)
I havn't studied creationism.
It's not really a subject you can truly study.
That's like saying you study the tale of Hansel and grettel.
It's an endearing story. You could probably trace it's roots. But once you trace it back far enough you'll either find the first person who told it or far more likely end up in a vague time-period from whence it originated. Which is fine, but at that point you know all there is to know about the subject.
And guess what, knowing all that still doesn't make the story itself true.
If I was going to believe in a supernatural theory of the origin of the universe I wouldn't choose Christian creationism. I'd probably go with the universe as a simulation.
I consider “Bat shit-crazy†not just the person who claims that something has existed forever.....and before anything was created there was nothing....and he knew everything about nothing that had not been created yet, with stuff that did not exist as he had not created it yet, nor did it even exist in his mind yet, but he knows exactly what doesn’t exist can do once existing should he make it exist and not a moment too soon so as to get the best return for his “bangâ€......but also the person who believes the person wat comes up with bat shit crazy,
I googed "the problem of information," and it refers to so many areas. If you read it all you'd be reading about business applications, politics, vaccine research, and God knows what else, but I did find this, and I think this is what Paolo thinks the problem of information is all about. He's obsessed with crazy shit and thinks we need to step back and reconsider more crazy shit. He will frame it as "for our own good," but really he just likes crazy shit. I didn't bother reading it. I glanced but it seems to be a summary of previously failed creationist arguments. There's nothing new in it. We've all studied this nonsense before way too many times.
https://www.trueorigin.org/dawkinfo.php
Quote from: Paolo on April 26, 2021, 02:07:55 AM
Just something that popped up in my head right now. Has anybody here who has studied creationism in any depth ever heard of the ''information problem''? What do you think about this matter?
It has depth? Anyway, this is one of those refuted-a-thousand-times-type arguments which can be found here (http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html). That way, no one has to waste time on it ever again.
Quote from: Cassia on April 26, 2021, 10:53:21 AM
Lets take a field trip to Ken Ham's bonehead ark encounter/creation museum. I always wanted to see stuffed dinosaurs in cages inside a boat shaped building. Giddyup
(https://images.huffingtonpost.com/2014-07-14-CreationMuseumTriceritops-thumb.jpg)
I've seen video of that place. It's like the Star Trek experience except looking backwards and down. It's actually a kinda sad monument to ignorance and vanity.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_sJMwLVfVcVw/Snz-CCRa4RI/AAAAAAAABn0/vUbTeme2Su8/s400/pz_dino_lg.jpeg)
Never heard of it (went to a creationist school), and google doesn't bring anything up on it.... so, no, haven't heard of it and cant say im too interested in it.
Quote from: Shiranu on April 26, 2021, 11:27:58 PM
Never heard of it (went to a creationist school), and google doesn't bring anything up on it.... so, no, haven't heard of it and cant say im too interested in it.
1) Assume that DNA letters are like machine code
2) Assume that any altering of this "code" is bad ("bad" in this context is intentionally poorly defined, and you're mostly supposed to just imply this part)
C) Evilution is a lie
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 26, 2021, 11:44:34 PM
1) Assume that DNA letters are like machine code
2) Assume that any altering of this "code" is bad ("bad" in this context is intentionally poorly defined, and you're mostly supposed to just imply this part)
C) Evilution is a lie
162 years since Darwin published "The Origin of Species", and that's the argument that is suppose to finally win the fight?
Oof.
Quote from: Shiranu on April 26, 2021, 11:59:37 PM162 years since Darwin published "The Origin of Species", and that's the argument that is suppose to finally win the fight?
It's either that or the "half a wing" thing or claiming that the Global Flood is real because lots of people have flood stories in their mythologies. Truly compelling stuff.
But yeah, that well of knowledge isn't deep enough to drown a rat.
Quote from: SGOS on April 26, 2021, 09:38:12 PM
I googed "the problem of information," and it refers to so many areas. If you read it all you'd be reading about business applications, politics, vaccine research, and God knows what else, but I did find this, and I think this is what Paolo thinks the problem of information is all about. He's obsessed with crazy shit and thinks we need to step back and reconsider more crazy shit. He will frame it as "for our own good," but really he just likes crazy shit. I didn't bother reading it. I glanced but it seems to be a summary of previously failed creationist arguments. There's nothing new in it. We've all studied this nonsense before way too many times.
https://www.trueorigin.org/dawkinfo.php
I didn't ask anyone to ''reconsider'' anything, I simply asked if anyone here had heard of it. Do you get off on putting words in my mouth or something?
Quote from: Paolo on April 27, 2021, 01:39:59 AM
I didn't ask anyone to ''reconsider'' anything, I simply asked if anyone here had heard of it. Do you get off on putting words in my mouth or something?
No, I just like speculating on the motives that drive unexplainable irrational behavior. If something is weird beyond explanation, I have this need to explain it, just for the closure. Don't make this about one isolated passive aggressive question. It's you, not just one question. You have managed to identify who you are in the forum. Irrational passive aggressive makes me edgy, so I cope by trying to explain it. So rather than whine about it, just admit that you are loving every moment of this exchange. Yes, yes; I am guilty of feeding the troll. Just enjoy it.
Quote from: SGOS on April 27, 2021, 07:57:28 AM
No, I just like speculating on the motives that drive unexplainable irrational behavior. If something is weird beyond explanation, I have this need to explain it, just for the closure. Don't make this about one isolated passive aggressive question. It's you, not just one question. You have managed to identify who you are in the forum. Irrational passive aggressive makes me edgy, so I cope by trying to explain it. So rather than whine about it, just admit that you are loving every moment of this exchange. Yes, yes; I am guilty of feeding the troll. Just enjoy it.
This may not apply to Paolo but I think there are many young people searching for a meaning to life. As religion diminishes...it leaves a hole. To be happy in disbelief, many people would need a radical step change in their sense of purpose. This is why people cling to the fairy tails and a patriarch who is gonna save them despite what their rational brain says. My sweetheart always says it takes courage to be a happy atheist!
Quote from: Cassia on April 27, 2021, 10:01:05 AM
This may not apply to Paolo but I think there are many young people searching for a meaning to life. As religion diminishes...it leaves a hole. To be happy in disbelief, many people would need a radical step change in their sense of purpose.
That "hole" that many people experience is something I have seriously underestimated.
For many, that hole could easily lead to being whole.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on April 27, 2021, 10:34:17 AM
That "hole" that many people experience is something I have seriously underestimated.
Quote from: Cassia on April 27, 2021, 10:01:05 AM
This may not apply to Paolo but I think there are many young people searching for a meaning to life. As religion diminishes...it leaves a hole. To be happy in disbelief, many people would need a radical step change in their sense of purpose. This is why people cling to the fairy tails and a patriarch who is gonna save them despite what their rational brain says. My sweetheart always says it takes courage to be a happy atheist!
It may not apply to Paolo. If it does, it explains why he might cling to the unsolvable mysteries as important to his world view, as he seems too. But he should not expect verification, approval or disapproval from atheists who simply can't give him any satisfactory verification for against what seems like mystery to him. He needs those who have answers to everything, especially the unknowable, and atheists are the least likely group to provide that.
But I believe the part about that hole people experience. Unlike Gymrat, I don't think I seriously underestimate that. If anything I may exaggerate it's size and veracity.
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 27, 2021, 10:52:51 AM
For many, that hole could easily lead to being whole.
I think people who study science have reached the precipice of a major shift in
the way we (some of us) think. Knowing things such as the fact that 50% of the cells in or on our bodies are not even human cells (walking mini biospheres) or that we do know what dinosaurs taste like when we eat chicken. How strange modern physics really is. The first look (really) into the complexity of neuroscience and our brains. There may be an ever widening divide between those who search out knowledge and those who retreat into false comfort. Almost like we will diverge into two different species..how is that for a sci-fi story?
Quote from: Cassia on April 27, 2021, 12:47:39 PM
Almost like we will diverge into two different species..how is that for a sci-fi story?
Well, it's happened before.
Quote from: Cassia on April 27, 2021, 12:47:39 PM
I think people who study science have reached the precipice of a major shift in the way we (some of us) think. Knowing things such as the fact that 50% of the cells in or on our bodies are not even human cells (walking mini biospheres) or that we do know what dinosaurs taste like when we eat chicken. How strange modern physics really is. The first look (really) into the complexity of neuroscience and our brains. There may be an ever widening divide between those who search out knowledge and those who retreat into false comfort. Almost like we will diverge into two different species..how is that for a sci-fi story?
Seems plausible to me. Throw in another factor--thinking takes time and energy while believing doesn't. Theism--the lazy person's vice. :)
Quote from: SGOS on April 27, 2021, 07:57:28 AM
No, I just like speculating on the motives that drive unexplainable irrational behavior. If something is weird beyond explanation, I have this need to explain it, just for the closure. Don't make this about one isolated passive aggressive question. It's you, not just one question. You have managed to identify who you are in the forum. Irrational passive aggressive makes me edgy, so I cope by trying to explain it. So rather than whine about it, just admit that you are loving every moment of this exchange. Yes, yes; I am guilty of feeding the troll. Just enjoy it.
Then I could be of great entertainment to you. Can I share some bizarre things I have done over the years? Or you'd rather take this to PM, since it's personal?
Quote from: Blackleaf on April 26, 2021, 10:15:28 AM
I assume the "problem of information" being talked about here is the problem Creationists say we have if we pretend that DNA is just like computer code in every way. But it's not like computer code. At all. So there is no problem. DNA "adding or subtracting information" (ie DNA getting longer or shorter) happens all the time. It's nothing special.
That's exactly what I was talking about. Thank you.
Now that that's been clarified, what do folks here think about it? I am asking everyone.
I believe this video addresses the crisis of meaning that we are discussing here.
https://youtu.be/vqJQvJ7i7Ek
Quote from: Paolo on April 27, 2021, 02:43:53 PM
That's exactly what I was talking about. Thank you.
Now that that's been clarified, what do folks here think about it? I am asking everyone.
You will often hear that our genes are a blueprint or a software algorithm for life, especially if someone wants to argue an intelligent god has created us. Yet DNA is not at all like software code or a set of blueprints. Nobody is reading the blueprint and nothing like a computer chip is executing 'code'. There is no centralized set of instructions that controls the development and maintenance of the human body.
DNA controls the growth and maintenance of the body indirectly using proteins and other chemicals. RNA viruses are so simple they need to hijack the DNA of their host to thrive and thus barely quality as 'living'.
Our bodies are made mostly of proteins. The messaging and gene expression (timing) process for growth and cell replacement occurs at a cellular level (cell division...no brains needed) via DNA. The encoding when cells divide is not always perfect and mutations can happen. Some mutations may be beneficial, some make no difference to survival and some go against survival.
Beneficial mutations can lead to variations in the short term and evolution (speciation) over a long time. The environment is loosely driving evolution. If the environment changes faster than evolution process can adapt then extinction occurs. Ninety nine percent of all species are extinct.
In short, there is no specific goal or structure like software or a blueprint yields. The only result might be survival (or not) and there is no way of predicting what form will evolve.
There is no design.
And to put it less eloquently: métaphores are good stories to comprehend things but do not get lost in the details.
Quote from: Paolo on April 27, 2021, 02:43:53 PM
That's exactly what I was talking about. Thank you.
Now that that's been clarified, what do folks here think about it? I am asking everyone.
I don't think about it. It's a fiction, so why dwell upon it? It simply does not enter into my mind.
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 27, 2021, 04:09:18 PM
I don't think about it. It's a fiction, so why dwell upon it? It simply does not enter into my mind.
The problem for me is that there just too many wonderful real things to learn about. And I can't even do all of them.
Quote from: SGOS on April 27, 2021, 04:34:22 PM
The problem for me is that there just too many wonderful real things to learn about. And I can't even do all of them.
Hear you on that one!
Quote from: Cassia on April 27, 2021, 03:34:03 PM
You will often hear that our genes are a blueprint or a software algorithm for life, especially if someone wants to argue an intelligent god has created us. Yet DNA is not at all like software code or a set of blueprints. Nobody is reading the blueprint and nothing like a computer chip is executing 'code'. There is no centralized set of instructions that controls the development and maintenance of the human body.
IIRC, Richard Dawkins explains DNA as more like a recipe than a blueprint. And of course, that's just an analogy, so that's not completely accurate, either.
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 27, 2021, 04:09:18 PM
I don't think about it. It's a fiction, so why dwell upon it? It simply does not enter into my mind.
So, works of fiction do not deserve study? Do you know that there is an entire field called ''Tolkien research'', for example?
Quote from: Paolo on April 28, 2021, 03:06:17 AM
So, works of fiction do not deserve study? Do you know that there is an entire field called ''Tolkien research'', for example?
Did not say fiction did not deserve study. Unless I have a specific reason to study religious fiction (as all of it is), I don't. My personal 'hobby' is the study of the fiction of Jesus. But other than that, I don't feel the desire to look into that type of fiction. I am not aware of 'Tolkien research' nor am I much interested. That does not mean you can't be interested. Joseph Campbell made a career studying the fiction of myth and the purpose it serves in our societies. At one time, I was very interested.
I guess my actual point is that you pull some obscure topic off the shelf, as if we are aware of it and what is our opinion. And you don't give us your opinion. They way you word these questions of yours feels like you are trying to set some kind of 'trap' for us. I find that annoying.