Exchange With Dan Marvin

A few weeks ago, a comment got left on a fairly old thread here by Dan Marvin, and we started an exchange. He then commented at Gator Freethought on the Tabash-Friel debate, and since I saw that he was trying to appeal to me personally I decided a switch to email would probably be more apropos than using our group's website. After the last email he sent me, Dan left a few more remarks at the Gator Freethought site, but I deleted them and am opening up this thread for the conversation to continue (if he should want it to) in this comment section. Dan feels I misrepresented his remarks (threats) about my wife going to hell, so I've reproduced all the emails in their entirety.

-----Original Message-----
From: S. Daniel Morgan
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:36 PM
To: Dan Marvin
Subject: Re: comment

Dan,

Really easier to email than leave comments back-and-forth.

Now, we are certainly going to disagree on many things, but I want to cut to the chase: the onus is on you. What I mean by that is that scientists have published hundreds of thousands of articles full of data on evolutionary biology. Physicists have published about the same number on topics that address the evolution of stars, our cosmos, the age of the earth, sun, galaxy, and even the universe. You reject it all. They have laid out their case in a systematic, logical fashion, displaying their presuppositions and evidences clearly. You just heard some arguments from people you think are trustworthy (Debmski, Wells, Meyers...all the Disco ID-iots), and so you're convinced that the global scientific community, of all creeds, races, religions, and backgrounds, are all, universally and emphatically *WRONG*.

Who is the burden of proof on? You!

Therefore, I ought to make you be more specific. When you say, "the flagellum," for instance, *which* flagellum? Did you know that a huge distinction must be made between extant bacterial flagella and archael flagella and eukaryotic flagella? Probably not. The ID-iocy movement doesn't like details.

http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Flagellum

Perhaps you would be interested in reading something I've written that addresses the supposed irreducible complexity (IC) of the flagellum:

http://blog.danielmorgan.name/2006/11/responding-to-id-review-of-their.html

It's very important to get creationists to give you a definition of information. If they can't even define it, then it should tell you (in a hurry) that they are relying upon colloquial "instincts" about information, rather than having a sound argument based on mathematics. There are really only two commonly accepted ways to define information, covered by either Shannon or by Kolmogorov. Both of these rely heavily upon the adage that, "complexity is non-compressibility" when it comes to information.

I can prove this to you by asking you to write a program that generates a given string of characters. The more complex the string, the less compressible your program or algorithm(s) will be. *THIS* is the sort of highly-technical, formal, *genuine* information theory that real mathematicians and computer scientists are quite familiar with. The sort that Dembski and others rely upon is the idea that "information is a message!" Which can be true, but can also be quite false.

I strongly recommend checking out computer scientist Mark Chu-Carroll's work in debunking the "information problem" for evolution. Start with the first two posts on what information *is*, then move on to the three indices: http://recursed.blogspot.com/2006/03/nancy-pearcey-creationists-miss.html http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2006/08/qa_what_is_information.php http://goodmath.blogspot.com/2006/06/information-theory-index.html http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/bad_math/debunking_creationism/ http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/information/infotheory.html

Edward Max also has a nice write-up (see section 1.2.2):

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fitness/

What you find in a hurry, my friend, is that the creationists don't know their hands from their asses, which is something we scientists have not been surprised about for decades.

If you think my web sources are wrong/dumb, I have a simple request of you: go to the nearest university, and ask a professor of mathematics or computer science how to define information, and thus how you might go about measuring the "information content of DNA" or some such other exercise that creationists love to hint around about but display their inability to produce any answers to whatsoever.

In the end, my suggestion is that you take each of these supposed "disproofs" of evolution and examine them *thoroughly*! Talk to all kinds of different experts, read books and articles at the library...actually do *research* on it instead of *trusting* these people who make money off of your credulity! That's what scientists do. People like them, all they do is take our (scientists) research and write books purporting to show how our work supports their anti-evolutionary stance, this despite the fact that only a fraction of actual scientists reject evolution. Think long and hard about that factoid.

Take care Dan, and don't write me back until you've done some HW. You can tell that I have.

With warm regards,
Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Marvin
Sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:51:49 -0700
To: S. Daniel Morgan
Subject: Re: comment

Daniel,

I respect the fact that you may not want to be humiliated in a public forum like your blog so we can do this in private.

“What you find in a hurry, my friend”

If 15-18 years is in a hurry then fine.

“When you say, "the flagellum," for instance, *which* flagellum? “

Bacterial flagellum is what I wrote right.

“You reject it all.”

One reason is that there is no logic in most of the arguments. (The classic frog turns into a prince fairytale) The Bible is clear and makes sense.

I admit some of the links you gave me went right over my limited brain. You are missing some huge point’s dude, and you are dodging the key point made here that God exists.

I am beginning to believe there is nothing that God can do to prove his existence to you, buddy. You will search so hard to find an alternative answer like your friend Eddie in that debate. I cherish how God simplifies things for us for us to comprehend, example: Jesus came to take the punishment that we deserve for breaking his laws, the Commandments. I am partial to Astrophysics I must admit, they use simplified terms to describe things because the universe is complicated enough. If you see spots on the sun they call it sun spots and if you see a hole in the universe that is black they call it black holes. They actually try to help people understand things in terms an 8 yr old understands. You, my friend, might not be like that.

I believe atheists have an ignorance fallacy that is very common. Explaining away Bacterial flagella or Origin of Information in some form that you accept as truth will not help you in your last days here on earth. Think about when you die, why would you delay to repent and put your trust in the savior? Are you waiting for a better offer? What does God have to do to prove his existence to you? Remember Todd pointed out the parable of the rich man and Lazarus what more “evidence” do you need. 1 Corinthians 1:19,1 Corinthians 2:14

I feel for you because you believe to have all the answers when actually God views you as a fool Psalm 14:1

Think about it, can man really explain what God knows.

“Do you know how many hairs are on the back of a fully grown male Tibetan yak? Probably not. I think, therefore, that it is reasonable for me to conclude that there are some things you don't know. It is important to ask these questions because there are some people who think they know everything. Let's say that you know an incredible one percent of all the knowledge in the universe. To know 100 percent, you would have to know everything. There wouldn't be a rock in the universe that you would not be intimately familiar with, or a grain of sand that you would not be aware of. You would know everything that has happened in history, from that which is common knowledge to the minor details of the secret love life of Napoleon's great-grandmother's black cat's fleas. You would know every hair of every head, and every thought of every heart. All history would be laid out before you, because you would be omniscient (all-knowing).

Bear in mind that one of the greatest scientists who ever lived, Thomas Edison, said, "We do not know a millionth of one percent about anything." Let me repeat: Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God? If you are reasonable, you will be forced to admit that it is possible. Somewhere, in the knowledge you haven't yet discovered, there could be enough evidence to prove that God does exist.” Ray Comfort

I will help you out in any way but you must understand that I can find a tremendous amount of flaws in Richard Dawkins theories and yes I have examples, but that will not help me or you when we face God on THAT DAY. BTW did you read my response to you on my blog?

For Him,

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: S. Daniel Morgan
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 4:51 PM
To: Dan Marvin
Subject: Re: comment

Dan,

Humiliated? Riiiiiiiight...(Dr. Evil) I don't want to clutter up my freethought group's webpage with a 1-on-1 conversation with you. Tell you what, feel free to post *all* of my two emails and comments to you on your own blog, so that I will be publicly humiliated.

There are eubacteria, archaea bacteria, and then eurkaryotes, all of which possess versions of cilia and flagella, and all of which are different. ID-iots don't tell their followers about it, because it confuses the issue (and they don't like details).

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/87/12/4576

The Bible is clear and makes sense? That's why there are 5,000 denominations of Christians and why the Jews and Muslims use the same OT that you do? Once again, cue in Dr. Evil..."Riiiiiiiiiiiight..."

Okay, so let's keep it simple. Information's complexity *can* be measured, using Shannon or K-C theories. This is pure math, that's all. What does that tell us? That the more random and stochastic a string, the more information it contains. These are the most difficult to compress or to express in algorithmic form.

Evolution is based upon stochastic, random processes in chemistry and biology. There is MUCH noise generated in the processes of genetics. Thus, it makes *perfect* sense that information is generated by evolution. Information and noise are interrelated. The creationists have no way to present any intelligible argument against this, so they, like Ray Comfort, use *analogies* which appeal to our human understanding of human activities. For example -- "if you see a book, that didn't happen by chance!" Yes, sure...right...because we know what books are, who makes them, their language and how they are made.

On the contrary, when we "read" the "book" of DNA, what do we find? Lots of very very complex things that have arisen through millennia of random and stochastic processes accumulating. For example, a friend of mine once issued the following simple challenge to show a creationist how silly the "information disproves evolution" argument really is:

Sequence 1: cag tgt ctt ggg ttc tcg cct gac tac gag acg cgt ttg tct tta cag gtc ctc ggc cag cac ctt aga caa gca ccc ggg acg cac ctt tca gtg ggc act cat aat ggc gga gta cca agg agg cac ggt cca ttg ttt tcg ggc cgg cat tgc tca tct ctt gag att tcc ata ctt

Sequence 2: tgg agt tct aag aca gta caa ctc tgc gac cgt gct ggg gta gcc act tct ggc cta atc tac gtt aca gaa aat ttg agg ttg cgc ggt gtc ctc gtt agg cac aca cgg gtg gaa tgg ggg tct ctt acc aaa ggg ctg ccg tat cag gta cga cgt agg tat tgc cgt gat aga ctg

Please use your 'procedure', whatever it may be, to measure the 'genetic information' content of these two sequences. Please write down the step-by-step process by which you measured the 'genetic information' content of these two sequences, being as clear and/or specific as you can.

http://www.creationtalk.com/message-board-forum/post-27800.html#27800

(I'm "Skiddum" on that board)

There's an old saying about catching a bullshitter by forcing him to walk you through something step-by-step and explain it. Oh, wait...no there's not, but there should be.

Now, here's my challenge to you -- find me *anyone* who can tell me what the "information content" of that sequence is. Anyone. The only requirement is that they explain it all the way through. Please note that this doesn't mean "find me someone who knows the codon triplets and can tell me which amino acids these encode", although that would be an added bonus.

The logical fallacy argumentum ad ignorantium is when we try to use something we don't know *as evidence* that is supposed to support something we do. Here are two simple examples, (i) "Jim, how many miles are on that car? Jeez, Pat, I don't know, I've never seen it before. But, the miles on that car prove that it's old!" (ii) "Tommy, my mommy and daddy told me babies come from a sperm and an egg? No way Jackie! I don't know where they come from, but I know that the stork brings them!"

These are two examples of someone postulating a possibility (i) the car is old; (ii) the stork brings babies, and trying to use their ignorance as if it is *evidence* for those propositions.

In the world of creationism and ID-iocy, it is: "Scientists Asimov tells me that the universe is 13 bln years old, and he explained why scientists think that way. But he doesn't know what came before that! Therefore, God exists!" and "Evolution can't fill in every single hole in our knowledge, and has unexplained questions. Therefore, creationism is true!"

What you guys suffer from is a basic inability to grasp your own non sequiturs. Even *if* evolution was wrong, it would *not* mean that the Evangelical YEC is true. There are an infinity of other possibilities, from natural explanations to other religious myths. It is simply a false dilemma to claim that, "Either evolution or YEC."

That's why Ray Comfort's argument below is wrong and stupid. I don't *have to know* anything. I simply claim, "I don't believe in your God, for reasons X, Y and Z." End of story. Do I claim that I know everything? Of course not! But when you claim that you *DO* know, and I ask you *HOW* you know, you can't answer me by asking me if I have all the answers! I don't claim to. You do! You're the one who claims to know all this stuff that is contradicted entirely by modern science. And then when I ask you to give me some semblence of a rational answer, you would just try to debunk science, as if this automatically means you would win. Even if science is wrong, if you have no comparable evidence and methodology, then you have nothing but blind faith! Which is exactly all you have.

In the end, all you can say is, "My god might exist!" To which I shrug my shoulders and walk away -- millions of gods *might* exist. I need evidence and compelling arguments to believe in any one of them, which I don't have. That's why I'm an atheist. It's not because I know it all. It's because you know nothing to make me believe otherwise. You're a dying breed, my friend, and your particular brand of religion is just one of millions that has co-evolved with humanity and its culture for eons. Some have gone extinct, and others have adapted, like yours.

With warm regards,

Daniel

PS: Get a Gmail account. Hotmail is outmoded.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Marvin
Sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 23:01:00 -0700
To: S. Daniel Morgan
Subject: Re: comment

Dude,

You are cracking me up. I don’t care if you actually know how to split atoms into mutated beer making zygotes. You are a draft dodger.

“Okay, so let's keep it simple. Information's complexity *can* be measured, using Shannon or K-C theories”

Are you listening to yourself? Really that is keeping it simple? Really? Are you kidding? Are you trying to flex in front of a mirror or something? How about this: Let’s keep it simple, have you ever lied? The 9th commandment in Revelations 21:8 it says all liars will have their part in the lake of fire. (Unbelievers also for that matter) Umm are you a believer Daniel?

“That's why there are 5,000 denominations of Christians”

I have done some advanced studies about this subject and they all may be wrong, I don’t know yet. That is one of the debates that I want to either be in or be in the audience. My opener would be “The mere fact there are different denominations negates the one true way as talked about in Jeremiah 32:38-40 . I did studies about the word church in the bible and found this: "Church" in the original text is "Ecclesia”. Ecclesia means convocation, gathering, congregation, meeting, etc. "Ecclesia tou demou" (meeting of the citizens). Not a building but a gathering.

On my site I have a link to verses that point to the possibility that Church is not the answer God still is. If you belive you must go to church, I give you this.

Again, on ignorance fallacy here is an example

“Hundreds of years ago, scientists made the same claim against bacteria – “I don’t see it, so it must not exist. These early skeptics fell into the trap of appealing to their own ignorance – another type of fallacy.”

I submit this:

For hundreds of years, atheists made the same claim against God – “I don’t see it, so it must not exist. These early skeptics fell into the trap of appealing to their own ignorance – another type of fallacy.”

“What you guys suffer from is a basic inability to grasp your own non sequiturs”

Great! Now you have me looking up Latin. You have me in stitches you are a funny nerd (a compliment because I claim geek status myself) if I was there next to you I would pinch your cheeks. God hates prideful boasters BTW so stop the flexing, muscleman. Yes, you think your brain is big, we get it, but that is just not the case (according to God) although I like you.

“I need evidence and compelling arguments to believe in any one of them, which I don't have”

Yes you do but you are choosing to hide behind man made arguments against God but none of it will work with God. You will claim to him “but God you haven’t shown me enough evidence” and he will spew you out and send you to the abyss. I would love nothing more to share a coffee with you in heaven someday and we say to each other ‘whew that was close, I almost didn’t take that leap of faith and ended up in hell” Just put Jesus on like you would a parachute dude, you claim you need proof and God says he will give it to you and will manifest himself to you but you must go to him on his terms not yours. He manifested himself to me and gave me undeniable proof without a doubt and I would die for him gladly. I am not afraid of a guy with a gun but I am afraid what God will do to him if he pulls the trigger when it is pointing at me.

PS: Get a Gmail account. Hotmail is outmoded.

I am old school, I know and I even own Google stock. I do have Gmail accounts but I can not sign in with multiple emails at least I don’t think I can still. Unfortunately I am using Outlook and I can not configure Gmail to it so I wait until I either stop using outlook or Google comes up with something with as many or same features.

In the end, all you can say is, "My god might exist!"

God does exist. Do you want to see your wife in hell burning forever? I went to your web site and saw your wife (marriage umm invented in the bible I believe) and my heart aches to think that because of your stubbornness and “she stands by her man” that she may not get to go to heaven. Do the leap of faith for her, challenge God himself. Pray to him and ask him to manifest himself as promised in John 14:21 and you promise to repent and trust in him in faith. HE WILL I wouldn’t lie to you, at least he wouldn’t. Give it time, and grow in his word (The Bible) I thought I was a Christian for years but I just believed in Jesus but that doesn’t matter (I found out later) what matters is if Jesus knows who YOU are. When he knew me he manifested himself to me and changed my heart forever. If you only knew me before I was a Christian then after you would be a believer easily.

Do you know what marriage is, God created it for us to have role play because when we get to heaven we followers of Christ will be his Jesus’ bride. He is the head and we are the body. In marriage on earth YOU are the head and your wife is the body of the family and she submits to you because you are the “captain” of the ship and have ultimate responsibility of the family (I assume you don’t have kids, if you do you will see how God works, I have three). What if someone was to rape your wife or mine and never gets caught would you consider it justice? Don’t you want a system of perfect justice? God makes sure there is justice in this perfect universe. God is the bully’s bully and I can relate to that. We can go into later how evolution removes morals and that survival of the fittest condones raping of woman and children to advance the seed of the strongest and God’s morals does not, Seals gets raped everyday all the time, but I am getting tired I have a life to lead.

I really care enough about you to tell you that you are wrong. Perfect love is a constant confronter. It takes far more love to confront then to just ignore the situation. I can’t watch a child perish in a burning home and I cannot stand idle watching you perish. We may disagree but your salvation is the most important thing in the world even more then your kids or wife or school or anything. In a plane you are instructed to put your oxygen mask on first then your kids so you do not pass out and you both die. So Daniel save yourself, put the mask of God on and then you can put one on your wife and future kids. He is right here waiting for you to put on the mask then he will save you. Go talk to him not me but if you need help I am here for you.

With love,

For Him,

Dan

At this point, Dan may take over my comment box and go wild. I have very little left to say to him unless he moves back into an intellectually-tenable position. We started out on scientific arguments, which he promptly avoided when I called his bluff. He quickly moved to question-begging and emotive pleas by telling me to think of my wife burning in hell. These guys are pretty weak, and it shows -- they can't win an argument so instead choose resorting to the "You better believe, or else!". If evidence is lacking, try threats!
________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Atheism, Philosophy, Intelligent Design, Evolution, Creationism