[[To be completely honest, he is also suggesting that evolutionary searches are not efficient enough to account for complex structures in the available time,]]
To be even more completely honest- he doubts that the whole of CSI IF it’s available in nature, can be transfered to species period.
[[But the fundamental question of where the information comes from is clearly stated by Dembski.]]
no it isn’t- He has stated that he’s not sure- whether it’s from outer space, or from nature or from soemwhere else undertmined. He can beleive anyhtign he likes, but reasonability does not indicate complete CSI can be transfered to genetic information- comunicaiton does NOT add infromaiton to cells- at best it can only ‘give an advantage’ to a species to allow the species an advantage IF nature works like the ‘hot warmer clode colder’ game he refers to. This should be obvious, but I guess he’s determined to explore this silly notion that nature is able to transfer info to biological systems via comunicaiton.
OK, but no one in biology claims that anything like that happens. Populations change as a result of accumulated copy errors. That's pretty much all that's necessary.
Well let's see what Dembski actiually says, as opposed to what you claim he says:
In evolutionary search, a large number offspring is often generated, and the more fit offspring are selected for the next generation. When some offspring are correctly announced as more fit than others, external knowledge is being applied to the search giving rise to active information. As with the child’s game of finding a hidden object, we are being told with respect to the solution whether we are getting ”colder” or ”warmer” to the target.