Let's think about information and the age of the earth debate. For the sake of discussion, let us say that there are three alternatives to consider for the actual age of the earth: a: YEC) The earth and indeed the whole universe is 10,000 years old or less b: OE) The earth and universe are more than 4 billion years old. c: Other) The age of the earth and universe is somewhere between these two numbers. Without any information on the topic, we are forced to give each option an equal chance of being true ATtention folks: DOn't let GUP20 read the next bit. He has been challenged to give a definition of what he means by information and we don't want to be giving him any useful hints. Let him continue to struggle with what he cannot define. We now define meaningful information as knowledge that allows us to change the odds we assign these numbers. Let us supply ourselves the knowledge that practically nobody on earth votes for possibility c; To a man, woman or child, they all seem to flop towards a or b. OK based on that piece of knowledge alone, perhaps we'll shift the odds to a = 40 percent b = 40 percent c = 20 percent Now lets add some more knowledge. The Bible, believed by a minority of the population to be literally true, literally asserts that the truth is found in option a. OK, given that a minority is involved, lets go to a = 45 percent b = 35 percent c = 20 percent Now lets add some more knowledge. The rocks of earth reveal radioactive decay isotopes that are consistent in quantity and placement with having accumulated for four and a half billion years from known processes of radioactive decay. This is the result of investigations over many years by hundreds of scientists, that is, kind of testing goes on and continues today and keeps coming up with the same results. Hmmm. That's pretty rock solid evidence . . . lets go to a = 5 percent b = 90 percent c = 5 percent Now lets add some more knowledge. Astronomers observe galaxies more than 10 billion light years distant from earth. Ooo - lets go a = 3 percent b = 95 percent c = 2 percent See how information is used? Now lets here it for information that will shift the odds towards proposition a. For example: The Bible in its literal interpretation is said by many to be literally true God divinely provided it for us that way. This is supported by the following evidence: a) The Bible has verses in it that can easily be interpreted to say that Oops, we have here the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. No new information is provided by circular reasoning. Lets try again. The Bible has the power to transform lives, making good people out of bad people and that should be taken into account in reading the creation narratives of the Bible. OK - that'll move the goal posts some. How about a = 5 percent b = 94 percent c = 1 percent Not moved more, because many books have the power to transform lives as well as the Bible. Now lets bring in some more knowledge. The Q'URAN asserts a over b and c. No change here. Not enough information about the Q'URAN presented to allow its testimony to bear any weight at all. OK That's how the game of applied information is played. Now what information can you supply that will have a part in helping shift the odds that a, b, or c is true?