Nice to see you TJ!

Related to some of these - I keep a thread for certain probability based arguments that pop up frequently.

Continuing the discussion from Comments on Gpuccio: Functional Information Methodology :
Pardon me, but my pet peeve has been perked! @AllenWitmerMiller , bring me my soapbox!
I am quoting @Gpuccio here, but only because this is the latest example of an error I see regularly, and darnit, I’m getting tired of correcting some basic probability calculations. The error is, probabilities do not multiply this way.
If X is some event and the probability of X occurring in a single trial is 0.1, then the probability of X occurring in two trials generates the following probability distribution:
The probability X does not occur in either of two trials: (1.0-0.1)\times(1.0 - 0.1) = 0.9 \times 0.9 = 0.81
The probability X occurs in the first trial but not the second: (0.1)\times(1.0 - 0.1) = 0.1 \times 0.9 = 0.09
The probability X does not occur in the first trial but does in the second: (1.0-0.1)\times(0.1) = 0.9 \times 0.1 = 0.09
The probability X occurs in both the first…
Long discussion of Information Theory here , probably too long to be useful.

T.j_Runyon:

IC

IC fails as any kind of scientific test, because a designer who can do anything is not falsifiable, not even in theory. Pretty much anything else that can be said about IC and ID is begging the question of testability.

3 Likes