ETA 2015/12/05: “Rubik’s Cube Is a Hand-Sized Illustration of Intelligent Design,” featured in the Discovery Institute’s Evolution News and Views, illustrates clearly the fallacious “conservation of information” reasoning discussed in a post of mine, “The Law of Conservation of Information Is Defunct.”
Checking for the next round in Pooh Bear’s popgun defense of Idlet, I find that Evolution News and Views has seen fit to feature a post in the mathematics category, “Rubik’s Cube Is a Hand-Sized Illustration of Intelligent Design,” but not to identify the author. The work is unmistakably that of Dennie O’Sneery, reprocessing reprocessed technical material that s/he does not understand, and reassuring the dimmest of blessedly assured wits that they are filled with the Holy Sass. Although it’s generally amusing to smash Dennie’s ambiguous little thingy to a bloody pulp, when s/he masochistically points it my way, I don’t have time for sadism now. Not to discourage you from whacking away (biohazard suit and ten-foot pole recommended), I’m treating this as a teachable moment.
1. What is the single most important point in my argument that the Conservation of Information Theorem does not apply to scientific investigation of nature?
2. O’Sneery conflates engineering of a process that generates a desired outcome with emergence of a natural process that generates a remarkable outcome. Do you see how s/he tacitly illustrates misapplication of the theorem?