I need Matt: (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, June 09, 2010, 03:37 (5261 days ago) @ David Turell

I can't follow any of this. Does this paper have any validity in explaining the vast store of information in biologic organisms?
> 
> http://procrustes.blogtownhall.com/2010/06/08/voom!_evolution_in_fourier_space_final_pa... just spent about 30min trying... -I'm of the opinion that this guy either doesn't know what he's talking about or he has NO skill whatsoever in explaining himself. He jumps--erratically--across topics that have no real relationship to each other. His explanation of FFT is pretty good actually, but he fails to make a point with this at all... -He states that some of the results of FFT's such as Parseval's theorem can be used to "prove" something or other in theology; The first blog post you showed me made me wary, but now I'm pretty convinced this guy's a nut. Mathematical theorems might serve as an inspiration to theology, but they cannot prove anything about theology. -Further down he states that "life cannot happen by random chance" but he provides no argument for this. Apparently I have to just accept that assertion.-The last section attempts to bring in some more information-theoretic ideas, but they are impenetrable. At least, I can say that Dembski's work is readable. This guy is incoherent. -The best I can get out of that section: He generally states that by building functions out of the different things you see in biology, stringing them together, and performing an FFT operation on them, you get the "voice of God." -I wish I could give you more, but his writing is as bad as what you get from a Postmodern writer. I think he's working from the same DI playbook as Dembski, though I can safely say that if someone could write a function to describe life--in other words, if it was as easy as he says it is--it would have been done. The fact that he babbles instead of doing such a thing... Meh.-So no--it's not just you. Incomprehensible.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"