(December 15, 2015 at 5:02 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:(December 15, 2015 at 12:49 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Would you agree, that specified complexity; that is a quality which is both ordered and varying in parts with a low probability requires an intelligence to make a choice? There was no answers to this question at uncommondescent. Perhaps you would like to take a crack a similar question. You come across a table with 500 quarters on it in the formation of an array equal distance apart. Every third quarter is facing heads up, the remaining are tails. Would you assume chance and natural forces for this configuration or something else?
If we take away the familiarity of the quarter, and assume instead that they are molecules in a crystal lattice, then I would want to conclude that it is natural; whether any vague "complex specified information" test would indicate as such is the important question. Note that the pattern of the quarters was easy to describe in a short sentence, because of the repetition.
I would agree, that in this instance, knowledge of the forces likely involved in a natural cause would likely preclude them as a suspect. Also, I would agree, that this example would fail the complex specified information test. While highly specified, in is not complex. It's not really about testing for specified complexity, but about trying to force natural causes into a gap where an intelligent agent makes the most since.
