Justifying the a priori rejection of the inductive ID hypothesis

I'm just elaborating on the 3 points npage85 did not address properly or at all.

1. It's not scientific because it makes references to variables that are not empirically tractable. (It's not clear to me that npage85 knows what a stochastic hypothesis is.)

2. It's not a hypothesis because it contains elements of theory selection. Npage85 hasn't even addressed this point.

3. It's not a valid inductive inference because the domain state in the predicted domain is strongly correlated to false positives.

The original masterpiece...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D2zHijUYlrQ

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• npage85
• intelligent
• design
• inference
• william
• dembski
• specified
• complexity

[npage85]

Unfortunately, your video response setting is set to "Approval Required."

I see that you've been online here quite a few times since posting my video as a response, but it still isn't up.

Here's the link:

watch?v=fqdRbpMnUWQ

[urbanelf]

Hey,

Sorry I haven't responded. I've had a super busy week at work and I've been avoiding conflicts on youtube.

I don't know why the vid response isn't going through. I don't filter my responses. I'll have to check my setting.

I thought your video was very interesting and your hypothesis was correct: I do disagree with you. More on this later.

[blickblocks]

I love your logic!

[urbanelf]

My logic loves you back.

[sum1unxpected]

i always like your videos,

thought i never watch the whole thing, because you reiterate your points for idiots.

[urbanelf]

I'm in "you-can't-fucking-possibly-st­rawman-me" mode.

[Jargonification]

Death by Type 1 Errorzz !!!11

Good video.

[npage85]

"Sorry I haven't responded. I've had a super busy week at work and I've been avoiding conflicts on youtube."

-- It's understandable... I just went through midterm week myself. ;)

"I don't know why the vid response isn't going through. I don't filter my responses. I'll have to check my setting."

-- Whenever I try to add it as a response, it says that it must first be approved by you. *shrug*

"...and your hypothesis was correct: I do disagree with you. More on this later."

-- lol... ;)

[ur2blind2c]

All of the videos you've done exposing the flaws of ID have been superb. Thank you for explaining in such clear, concise and understandable terms concepts that might otherwise be too esoteric for many of us without a backgroud in statistics, etc. I really, really appreciate you doing this!

[LibertyIsNotGiven]

Npage85 ignoring and misrepresenting the opposition??? I am shocked!

As always, extremely well done, UE. All of your Dembski demolitions have been great.

[FortheLaughofGod]

Npage 85 doesn't use his logical vocabulary very well, and I've yet to determine whether this is because he actually has very little education or understanding of propositional calculus, or whether he's just not very well spoken when he discusses it. You do not commit an argument from ignorance, as far as I can tell.