Explaining the Cancer Information Calculation

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Rumraket

When you say it’s not about probability , but then go to to say it’s about whether it’s likely capable of the job, you’re contradicting yourself. If you really mean to say it’s not about probability you need to take out the word ‘likely’ from the latter part of your statement. But if you do that, you also discard Dembski’s argument, which is explicitly based on probabilities.

It’s about probability of a mechanism. It’s not about probability on its own or of the event itself happening. The event happened; the debate is about how it happened. Thanks for the correction.