[Diamond]

For myself, I cannot escape the belief, really a conclusion, that all of the Universe, all of reality, is a product of design

Herein lies the difficulty of answering the ice cyrstal problem.

As one of my conditions stipulated, the criterion proposed by Dembski is not useful for determining that something is NOT designed. It is useful, however, for detecting design.

Thus, my answer to the ice crystal picture is this:

Putting aside the context of anthropic principle for purposes of this answer, the object in question lacks the contingency and possibly the independently given pattern necessary to positively infer design. While inorganic crystalline strucures do indeed have a certain level of complexity, they do not meet the standard of contingency required by the criterion, since the formation of ice crystals is reducible to the operation of physical/chemical laws of chemical bonding, temperature, and so on. There might be a specification pattern inherent in the six-pointed star but since the crystal is the result of physical necessity it is not neccessary to ascertain whether or not what looks like a six-pointed star constitutes an independently given pattern in this case.

So, Regis, putting aside anthropic parameters, without which ice cystrals would not be possible, the ice crystal does not exhibit the level of specified complexity that would render a secure design inference. Yes, Regis, that's my final answer to #2. If you feel my answer is not satisfactory for some reason related to the conditions of the test please let me know and I will try to be more specific.

Cordially,

[PatrickHenry]

... the object in question [the ice crystal picture in post #8] lacks the contingency and possibly the independently given pattern necessary to positively infer design.

The tension mounts, the ominous music in the background grows louder ...

(And I, for one, can't figure out what the answer means.)

[general_re]

Let me be sure that I understand before moving on to the next one. Are you saying that you don't have enough information to render a definitive answer? That is, given more information about the properties of the object, would you be able to produce an answer? If so, I can try to provide more to you to assist you in so doing. Or are you stating that the information given is adequate, but does not support a determination of the presence of design?

More concisely, is your answer "not enough information to tell" or "it doesn't look designed, but there remains the possibility of a false negative"?