Monday, October 1, 2007

Dr. Dawkins Information Challenge

If you want to listen to the podcast then click here and it will take you to the page where you can access the podcast.
"On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin addresses Richard Dawkins’ Information Challenge. When Dawkins was recently asked to explain the origin of genetic information according to Darwinism, he was embarrassingly silent. He later claimed to rebut this question using Shannon information, but Luskin reveals just how inadequate Dawkins’ explanation is when it comes to explaining the specified complexity of information."
You can click on the title bar and read Luskin's article.


Anonymous said...

It amazing how much "blind faith" evolutionst have. They refuse to accept any hard evidence or facts that go against there perverse religion.

R. Hoeppner said...

You're right on point. Every atheist I've ever spoken to has based their atheism firmly on evolution and will deny 'till they're blue in the face that they aren't religious. But something quite interesting has recently happened. Michael Newdow (the atheist from Sacramento and spokesman for most atheists)who is working to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance clearly stated several times that Atheism is a religion.

Allen said...

Speaking of perverse religions according to atheism we are nothing more than molecules. It would be unintelligent to judge anyone for wronging anyone because any perception of a person being there would be a delusion. Also according to the second law of thermodynamics all of the usable energy in the universe will be used up eventually and there will be no living things anywhere. Humanity will be as if it never were. There couldn't even be any aliens around to appreciate us. So what anyone does now doesn't really have any consequence in the end. Mass murderers, rapists, and all others that harm others should be overlooked because it doesn't really matter. Just to further prove my point with more absurdity dealing with them could possibly speed up the usable energy drain that will eventually lead to the demise of everything. It would obviously be a relatively infinitesimal amount but when the end is nothing can we really afford it?