We Are Mystified by Eric Holloway

No. You misunderstood me. Please show me any quotes that show I was arguing against the law of non information growth. I would like to see them. That is one of the great things about having this exchange on a forum. We can go back and look at what was said. Please show many any quotes that you think show I contested the law of no-information growth.

I never did.

In fact, I explained it and proved it several times. I repeated over and over again the problem was your application of it to the empirical domain. You frequently forgot this, and I had to repeat it again. Not what I wrote on August 10th, at the very beginning of our many exchanges:

Remember why we went down the path of simulation?

And here, I mean in the empirical domain. As is clear from the context I just quoted.

Prima facia it seems true to me, as a person who works with biological data all the time. You often note that you do not know much about biology. Why should we trust your instincts over mine?

It is your perception. I’m trying to help you.

@pnelson is a good friend of mine. He has said many times that one role I can play for ID is to help you root out your bad arguments. If you want ID to be taken seriously, you need to ruthlessly slaughter every bad argument in the ID camp. It will be a blood bath, and I’ve been one of the few scholars willing to help you with this.

Remember, I do not reject design. God created us. He designed us all. At the same time, fallacious arguments do great damage to our understanding of truth. I do not believe God wants fallacious arguments from us. The information arguments for ID are a lot like:

We know God designed us, because 1 + 1 = 3.

I see no value in protecting these arguments. Remember, also, from the beginning the claim has been that only intelligence can produce MI in DNA. It turns out that common descent can too, precisely as I have been saying from the beginning. This was blindingly obvious to me. It was obvious to @dga471, and others here too, as they were immediately able to follow the logic of information theory as I laid it out.

In contrast, It has taken an immense amount of effort to bring you along. It seems it has required unlearning many things. The only reason I’m doing that is with people like @pnelson in mind. I am doing this to help you in a way that only a friend could do for you.

Be ruthless in shedding the bad arguments. Maybe thing you’ll sift through it all and find a good argument. So I am here to help you. Not to hurt you.