Then everything imaginable is evidence for ID. Even random noise is evidence for ID.
Is random noise contingent? Yes.
Is random noise complex? Yes.
Is random noise specified in the sense that it conforms to an independent pattern? Yes(the pattern being random noise).
The last answer should be “NO”, because gears made by humans didn’t exist until long after baby hoppers had them, so for most of their existence there was no independent pattern.
interesting challenge. first: do you think there is any object that we can both agree that its a proof of design? of instance: what about gears that made out of wood?
Science is not about proof. It is about forming hypothesis and testing them. For ID the hypothesis is that a mind is behind what is being observed. The test is if a mind can perform a similar task.
Now that you have « produced» this sequence of letters, yes. Indeed, if at this point someone produces this same sequence of letters, we can be quite sure that he will do so not by chance but by design, because the sequence is now specified.
I want you to tell me if that sequence of letters is designed or not. Did I randomly pick letters out of my scrabble box ( I’m playing scrabble right now) or is it intelligently designed? It’s defintely contingent. Definitely complex. Is it specified? Or is it just jibberish?
They didn’t know it was a designed object. They just knew there was this big fuck off monolith in a spot where it wasn’t before, and it freaked them out.
Imagine that right now, one hour after you produced your sequence of letters, I am playing scrabble. And imagine that I pick 26 letters out of my scrabble box and put them on the scrabble board. And imagine, guess what, that the sequence of my 26 letters corresponds to your sequence. Would you say that I picked the letter blindly and randomly? Of course not. You would rightly say that I purposely chose the letters in order to reproduce your sequence, IOW in order to match a specification ( an independently given pattern).
That’s not what I asked. I asked if my original
Sequence was designed or not. ID is supposed to be able to answer these questions. If you can’t do it that’s fine. Did I pick them randomly or did I pick the exact ones for a reason and arrange them in a meaningful way?
What is the independently given pattern in any DNA sequences or any amino acids which indicate Design? All I see are IDers writing down the sequences they found and then claiming that is a specification.
It is specified. Me and my sister have made up our own languages and codes. She knows exactly what that says. “Hello Taylor”. So back to my point. The design filter is useless because it can’t reliably identify specification because it’s completely subjective.
This is your claim however you assert it is a logic failure. If it is a logic failure it is yours. Can you support the claim that you made a logic failure here with this statement that is uniquely yours?