I've forgotten some of the rules. Is it sufficient to support (but not "prove") the design inference merely if the subject correctly declares the correct answers? Or is he required to explain his reasoning as to each designed item? Without the objective criteria that led to the design conclusion, we won't have learned much, even if the ID test-taker gets them all correctly.
I'm not engaged in a defensive play to salvage my own views in case the experiment works out for the ID side. But if ID is to be a viable, respected hypothesis, we should all be able to understand how the designed objects are differentiated from the others. Otherwise, there's always the possibility that it was a series of lucky guesses, or he was previously familiar with the pics, or even that you and he cheated via freepmail. I'm really not making excuses in advance, just trying to make the test as useful as possible.
If the design inference is to be useful, it seems common sense that it should be accessible to anyone who wishes to use it. Indeed, Diamond said as much earlier in the thread, by stating that the design inference should be readily defensible. And so it should be explained and defended.
I admit - I will be enormously surprised if it works. But I am also not a fool - if it does work, I want to know how, so that I can put it to work for me. A few moments of contemplation ought to be enough to imagine the possibilities of such a thing, and I'm not about to reject a tool like that just because I was skeptical yesterday ;)
Otherwise, there's always the possibility that it was a series of lucky guesses, or he was previously familiar with the pics, or even that you and he cheated via freepmail. I'm really not making excuses in advance, just trying to make the test as useful as possible.
Well, exactly. I can say that I am playing honestly, and it has never entered my mind that Diamond would behave otherwise - such would be very much out of character for Diamond, and would be rather surprising to a great many people, I think. But I understand - if the design inference is to be useful, it should be accessible to others, so that it is not some sort of deep secret held by Diamond and Dembski. I don't want to say that it should be accessible to everyone, because some people are just idiots, but it should at least be accessible to people who are as intelligent as Diamond and Dembski are ;)