The Design Inference Game

03/03/03 | Moi

[general_re]

I thought a new thread was a good idea, and here seems to be a good place to put it, so as not to clutter up "News". The only topic available was "heated discussion", though. ;)

If any clarification about the pictures is needed, just say so, and I will try to at least highlight the part that I am interested in for you. Remember that I'm interested in the objects or structures or artifacts being represented, so don't be thrown off if the illustrations seem abstract.

[Rachumlakenschlaff]

I haven't noticed very many models of emotion or animal behavior, except in film making and video games.

And, at the end of the day, if we succeed in creating AI, we will have shown that intelligence can be created by intelligent beings.

[Diamond]

Fire away, general!

It's ok to hit me with another pic. Really. I can use the valuable, thought-provoking exercise with my FRiends.

Cordially,

[Alamo-Girl]

Great catch! Thanks for your post!

[tacticalogic]

FYI

[unspun]

FYI

Why thank you. An underlying construct, very applicable in today's fashion of thought and locus of mind.

[tacticalogic]

An underlying construct, very applicable in today's fashion of thought and locus of mind.

UH-OH. I may have committed a faux paux. Are underlying constructs okay before Spring?

[PatrickHenry]

Oops! Belated hugs and *smooch*!

Let's have no more of this belated stuff. When you post to me, you better pucker up! [Hugs!]

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOL! Hugs and *smooches*!

[Diamond]

Can you guys please hold it down over there? How can a guy think in here with all this metaphysical smooching and making-out going on!

Cordially,

[Lurking Libertarian]

Metaphysical smooching placemarker.

[PatrickHenry]

Can you guys please hold it down over there?

This is the "Smokey Backroom." A-Girl and I intend to indulge ourselves here. Just look the other way.

[f.Christian]

Would it be possible for you to reply with something respondant to what I posted, in English?

I don't know your 1st language ... what is it --- evobonics // mother goose ? ?

[tacticalogic]

I don't know your 1st language

And I don't know why you have to try and turn a comment about the general nature of objectivity into a pissing match about evolution.

[unspun]

...turn a comment about the general nature of objectivity into a pissing match about evolution.

Well to be fair to all, that grand urological contest is the context for this thread. Chuckling... fC, you do have a distinctive way of communicating; have I mentioned that before? It makes for... something, though I'm not sure "reasonable discussion" is quite what I would say. (It might take betty boop to describe our various processes of the conscious self, while reading them.) I wonder if reflects a kind of mutation - not yours of course. (Those very rarely are for the good, as you know.) Maybe it's a duplicate code of some kind in your PC.

Waiting for the next picture... and no, you can't use one of f.Christian's posts.

(You know I love and respect you fC.)

But, no hugs or kisses solicited, metaphysical or otherwise. My genetics are mostly British and Scandanavian, afterall.

Evobonics, eh? -chuckles-

[unspun]

...Imaginary Baseball, inevitably based upon Reality, however.

[tacticalogic]

Well to be fair to all, that grand urological contest is the context for this thread.

True enough, but I came in late, and only responded to you and the specific post you pinged me to. I've spent the day trying to solve an integration problem while the vendors engage in an endless game of round robin finger pointing. Engaging in a simple adult conversation without some yapping little rat dog hanging off my pant cuff didn't seem like too much to ask for.

[PatrickHenry]

Well? Bring on the next image!

[unspun]

Appreciate your contribution. The 'Design Inference Game' is a challenge to test an Intelligent Design theorist's ideas about the ability (man's ability) to tell design from naturalistic development, via certain criteria. Ten pictures will be presented by general_re, and it's up to Diamond to tell what is what and why.

While he waits for the next picture, it might be nice for Diamond to post any link he might have, to this ID theorist and criteria! (Pardon if alread done.)

Popcorn would be nice, too.

[Condorman]

Diamond: That large mound of bits and pieces of earth held together by adhesive can only be the result of design. If you need the rationale I will attempt to give it tomorrow am.

Sorry to intrude (and I understand you have been sidetracked of late, Diamond), but I was interested in the explanation behind the conclusion. Or did I just miss it?

[tacticalogic]

Sounds interesting. Structures whose development is dependent on fractals are going to be fun to figure out. From an engineers standpoing, if there is intelligent design, ie "form", then the next question is to function.