Customer Reviews

In the Beginning Was Information: A Scientist Explains the Incredible Design in Nature

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The German professor Werner Gitt, in his landmark book In The Beginning Was Information provides a rigorously formal presentation and his book is well worth reading.
Gitt's argument is summarized in the following 8 theorems:
(1) No information can exist without a code.
(2) No code can exist without a free and deliberate convention.
(3) No information can exist without the five hierarchical levels: statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and apobetics [note: apobetics is Gitt's term, referring to the fact that there can be shown to be
a will and a larger objective behind all instances of intent].
(4) No information can exist in purely statistical processes.
(5) No information can exist without a transmitter.
(6) No information chain can exist without a mental origin.
(7) No information can exist without an initial mental source; that is, information is, by its nature, a mental and not a material quantity.
(8) No information can exist without a will.
These theorems are similar to the laws of gravity and the laws of thermodynamics, in that no counterexample has ever been found. Gitt has presented this proof to university audiences of many thousands of people across Europe, and no one has ever been able to point out an exception. Numerous rebuttals to Gitt's theorems have been made, but in each instance, every one ignores or dismisses semantics and intent, properties that are essential to all forms of communication.
Unless / until a contradictory example can be found, these theorems are taken to be universally true.

For any reviewer to question Dr. Prof. Gitt's knowledge of the topic, only shows ignorance on his/her part

Werner Gitt is a creationist who happens to be an accomplished scientist and knowledgeable about information and its theory. The discovery of information in the DNA and its complexity has cast very grave doubts on the viability of random chance and natural selection as an explanation for how we got here from nothing. He very meticulously discusses in theorem format the basics of information and how they apply to the discussion at hand. The discussion involves a lot of mathematics which is fairly straightforward to those with mathematical training. If you aren't, you can skim over the math since it is directed to a more technical audience and is the "proof" and demonstration of the points he is making. At the end of the discussion, he has shown that there is no chance that the information could have evolved using Darwinian paradigm. This is not particularly surprising since I have read several books that do the same thing in less depth. The difference with this book is that I learned a lot about information theory and how it works. He has three appendices that I found pretty tedious because I wasn't interested in that depth. He has a couple of chapters on the Bible that many may not be of particular interested.

I recommend this book not primarily for his demonstration of the very great unlikelihood that information could be accommodated using the Darwinian paradigm but because you can learn a lot about information/communication theory if you aren't conversant with it like I wasn't. You can reach your own conclusions then. If you are conversant with information theory, it may be worthwhile because you could give it a much more insightful and incisive review than I can. Either way, Darwinist or not, there is profit in this book.

The author is a professor for informatics. He found a new scientific law that will be hardly disproved. He explains in this book the information theory which, in case it is true, must have far reaching effects on other fields of science as well, for example Biology, because for Gitt the genetic Code in life forms is nothing else than non-material information which as DNA carries like newspaper a message.
The peculiarity is now that information is per se nothing material and can never be. Thus the question arises whence the information of the DNA came from when it has a non-material origin. The author answers this question very thoroughly. His argumentation is easily understood.
He starts to explain what matters most with nature laws as necessary conclusions from observation of nature. Laws can only be formulated when parameters are found with which it is possible to describe the nature. It must be possible to make predictions which can be falsified. When the statement is wrong, it should be possible to disprove it by suitable research.
Next the author describes the essence of information. He shows that in every kind of construction and production according to the intention a planning must be performed which then comes to an operation manual how the project should be executed in the end. For this a language or code is used. Everywhere in nature we come across information in codes. Information is beside energy and matter a basic factor in the world, but a non material one!
This is the big difference. The author formulates a nomological information theory. The most important statement is that the information process is a spiritual forethought process that can only in transportation be material that it can be read in this material world. Every word that is spoken or written, because it is heard and read, that is "seen", shows this principle. Software is on physical data medium without being itself material, because the program is not material.
The author is not silent that this further reflected must create doubts about the conventional materialistic theories of world- and life evolution.
From the scientific point of view all the scientific materialism, evolution theory and even atheism are not savable, since information can always be traced back to a person, that is a thinking being. Hence only the conclusion remains that the life forms are planned phenomenons and that there must be a planner.
In the last part of the book the author applies the information theory also on the Bible. The Bible also is nothing different than a process manual of an intelligent information source.
Very readable book that can widen your scientific horizon.

Dr. Gitt has provided a superb literary segue into deeper realms of argument against the theory of evolution versus the reality of God, our Creator.

All interested in Scientific consideration will be stirred by Dr. Gitt's labors in the field of information.

Evolution is once again exposed as a lifeless form when logic is applied.

Readers await breathlessly the first alphabet concocted by the chance bangings of any in the animal kingdom. While in limbo, they would do well to read this book. They will finish the book before the first letter is formed !

A joyful companion work to the host of design books available, it challenges evolutionists at the basic level. If Darwin is right, why have his apobetics decreased?

For those newly arrived in the field, where is one shred of EVIDENCE that evolution is true? National Geographic can't help you, though they do take some of the best pictures in the world.

Meanwhile, apobetically speaking, peruse John 1:1, I John 5:13, and John 3:16.

Then read 'In the beginning was information.'

Or, reverse the order. It's all in the information.

TL Farley,
bibleraptureprophecy.com
author,

When Now Becomes Too Late {If we believe Jesus rose again -- The imminence of the Rapture.} Available in print, ebook, and on Kindle.

This book represents one of the most profound declarations for intelligent design I have read.
Information is defined in the dictionary as, "knowledge communicated or received". In science it goes a little further as, "initial data (from some "initiator/designer"), encrypted in some form of code, stored in some format, transmitted to a recipient, and acted upon by that recipient." The "code" can be oral (language), written (as an alphabet), computerized (bits), or, as in all organisms, genetic (remember the genetic code?).
Information, being a "fundamental property like mass and energy", is intrinsic in all technology; every developed system contains information; every piece of matter or energy contains information, but like the human will is not material as is mass and energy. All information must have an initial source (the initiator/designer).
Herein is the evolutionist's problem, where they are inconsistent in theory and where intelligent design comes in as science.
Information density is the amount of information in a specific "container". The microchip
in my desktop contains massive amounts of information, but the "simple" ant contains more than 7 million, million times as much. Science simply stands in awe, yet in all humility claims evolution did it.

I recently finished reading this book. It contains a detailed description of perhaps the most devastating argument against evolutionary theory. It is truly difficult to nutshell the "information argument," but it has to do with the origin of information, and the argument that information cannot occur naturally, but rather has to come from an intelligent source.

This book is beautifully crafted. It was originally written in German and carefully translated to English. It uses simple premises and builds upon them until a solid logical structure is in place.

I read some of the critiques on this book or even this argument itself, and I find it amusing that though people will berate the author, the argument, the Bible, or anyone who doesn't believe in evolution, they never offer any alternative explanation as to how information could arise naturally. They call the claims of the Bible "magic," yet will dogmatically adhere to their belief that life came into existence spontaneously from an unknown cause which they choose to label "natural" instead of "magic."

One other part of the book I really enjoyed was the entries in the Appendix. A good part the first section in the appendix (which I skimmed =) was mathematical (like calculus formulas). The latter portions of the appendix were great fun to read. There was tons of interesting facts about languages, animals, and other things related to the topic of information and energy -- things that really put us in awe of our Creator's infinite powers.

Werner Gitt's knowledge of "information" is truly amazing. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and doing it in such an understandable way. Highly recommended.

The "creationist comedy" genre is experiencing a neo-medieval revival, and this book is a solid addition to the wide but shallow repertoire of error, distortion, and pseudoscience that typifies the category.

Anyone familiar with information theory must question whether Gitt has even cursory knowledge of the topic. He consistently arrives at conclusions before comprehending what he's talking about. Logic and sequence aside, regurgitating hairballs of erroneous prose (ala Dembski - perhaps they collaborated), does not constitute scholarship, cogent reasoning, or proof.

Gitt twits around Shannon information theory just long enough to showcase his befuddlement, and then proceeds to make hefty deposits to the bank of cluelessness with comments like:

"The highest information density known to us is that of the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecules of living cells. This chemical storage medium is 2 nm in diameter and has a 3.4 NM helix pitch (see Figure 1). This results in a volume of 10.68 x 10-21 cm3 per spiral. Each spiral contains ten chemical letters (nucleotides), resulting in a volumetric information density of 0.94 x 1021 letters/cm3. In the genetic alphabet, the DNA molecules contain only the four nucleotide bases, that is, adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine. The information content of such a letter is 2 bits/nucleotide. Thus, the statistical information density is 1.88 x 1021 bits/cm3."

Sounds impressive, but lacks substance. DNA does not possess the "highest information density known." The very concept of information density is poorly defined in the scientific literature - and Gitt doesn't even attempt to present a working, let alone workable definition in his creationist faux-science alternative. How do you compare the "information density" of a DNA molecule with the information density of an electromagnetic wave emitted by a pulsar? It's a meaningless comparison.

Gitt then claims that Shannon theory is incomplete because (as intended by Shannon), it focuses on a quantitative measure of information. It doesn't care what the message means. He sets out to "fix" this nonexistent problem by positing five layers of information: statistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and apobetics. Gitt then pontificates that Shannon theory, and information theory as a whole, only concerns itself with statistics because it doesn't differentiate between syntactically valid and invalid information. Gitt's scheme, which has more in common with linguistics than information theory, enshrines Apobetics (a word he invents) as the most important attribute, and defines it as the "purpose" of the message (for reasons that will soon become clear).

Throughout "In the Beginning Was Information" Gitt is constantly inventing "theorems." He doesn't seem to understand what the word means in this context, because Gitt's "theorems" are just statements that he hopes are true, but which are unproven, and are often unproveable.

Here are just a few of Gitt's theorems (in the interests of relative brevity I've omitted his "Empirical Principles, Necessary Conditions, and Sufficient Conditions"):

"Theorem 4: A code is an absolutely necessary condition for the representation of information."

"Theorem 5: The assignment of the symbol set is based on convention and constitutes a mental process."

"Theorem 6: Once the code has been freely defined by convention, this definition must be strictly observed thereafter."

"Theorem 7: The code used must be known both to the transmitter and receiver if the information is to be understood."

"Theorem 8: Only those structures that are based on a code can represent information (because of Theorem 4). This is a necessary, but still inadequate, condition for the existence of information."

"Theorem 9: Only that which contains semantics is information."

"Theorem 10: Each item of information needs, if it is traced back to the beginning of the transmission chain, a mental source (transmitter)."

How does Gitt conclude that a code is a necessary condition for the representation of information? He just asserts it. Worse, how does he conclude that only things that are based on a code represent information? Again, just an assertion - but at least in this case a reasonable one. Gitt asserts that nothing without structured encoding is information. And this is also the absolute crux of his argument: information only exists as a part of a code designed by an intelligent "mental source" (Gitt's God).

Despite the fact that Gitt claims to be completing Shannon theory, there is no math in the rest of his argument. It's like watching the all words, all assertions, all the time channel.

Gitt's tottering house of cards continues to outreach his grasp as he piles on additional theorems:

"Theorem 11: The apobetic aspect of information is the most important, because it embraces the objective of the transmitter. The entire effort involved in the four lower levels is necessary only as a means to an end in order to achieve this objective."

After this literal instance of special revelation, Gitt reaches his pseudo-information theory apotheosis by brazenly asserting that he has mathematically completed Shannon's information theory! He then gushes about how the "most important empirical principles relating to the concept of information have been defined in the form of theorems."

Ultimately, to Gitt, a theorem is nothing but a "form," a syntactic structure, and his entire argument, as put forth in this book, is mathematically complete. Note to Gitt: not in this quantum reality. Next time do some serious, honest, and real science by offering a mathematically rigorous proof, not a loopy creationist "poof" as in "snapping fingers together and magically poofing things into existence."

After chapters of mind-numbing dreck and detritus Gitt discloses his real agenda:

"The Bible has long made it clear that the creation of the original groups of fully operational living creatures, programmed to transmit their information to their descendants, was the deliberate act of the mind and the will of the Creator, the great Logos Jesus Christ."

Gitt culminates his descent into gibberish with:

"We have already shown that life is overwhelmingly loaded with information; it should be clear that a rigorous application of the science of information is devastating to materialistic philosophy in the guise of evolution, and strongly supportive of Genesis creation."

It's a grand mal seizure moment - pure epileptic epiphany unconstrained by any nuance of reality or reason: DNA is a message with the highest possible information density because it encodes the literal uber-mind of the creator, God. Gitt also claims that said deity left behind a written and inerrant version of the creation event (in a less information dense form) known as the Book of Genesis, and that this myth masquerading as fact - along with the rest of the Bible - constitutes the ultimate moral and scientific truth in the universe, overthrowing over all extent or contemplated materialist skullduggery. Second note to Gitt: don't expect the Nobel Prize Committee (for Science, Peace, or Literature) to call any time soon.

As usual the twits (or Gitts) who write this stuff pretend to string together logical, scientific, and mathematically rigorous arguments for the existence of God - but they can only deliver this "miraculous" outcome by resorting to sleight-of-hand circular reasoning that specifically includes God as a necessary premise (implicitly woven throughout Gitt's Empirical Principles, Theorems, and Conditions).

"In the Beginning Was Information" has nothing honest, useful, or scientific to say about beginnings or information. The edifice of science based on methodological naturalism remains unshaken by Gitt's faith-based delusions and just-so story assertions. For a book that claims to be about information, very little is actually present.

If you want to know why the original information required to even begin the development of the simplest living entity is such a crucial issue, take the time to read this book and think deeply about the existence of living things. To understand issues relating to current origin theory Werner Gitt's work is an absolute primer. He organizes his data and argument like a scientist, so while this is written for non-scientists to understand, it is not something you can merely skim. Gitt examines various scientific explanations for information and organism development and takes you through the theory and data methodically. He is upfront about his own beliefs, and like any scientist reports his own conclusions on the data; however, readers are free to make their own. His discussion is lucid, and though the translation from the German is superb, this is not a facile read for the light minded. His appendix is thick with data and visuals to augment the thought process. Knowledge worth having requires some work: I recommend that anyone interested in human origins make the effort to read and understand what this scientist is contributing to the discussion. Interestingly, there is no solution in evolutionary theory for the origin of information from material: theoretical claims to generation of information from material have no corresponding data.

It is a good book to show an obvious thing: coded information, like a software or genomic DNA, does not emerge out of purely impersonal natural processes, this sort of thing requires a mind. Atheists hate that, but anyways...

Gitt presents an attempt to define information and to show that DNA constitutes coded information of the sort that requires a mind to come about. IMO, the flaw of this book is: while his conclusion applies 100 % to abiogenesis, it does not make large scale evolutionary change impossible as he claims. And he should indeed have tried to show the criteria he uses to measure information, otherwise we cant say for sure when information is lost or gained.

Despite of these two flaws, i recommennd the book anyway, last time i checked (2007) it seems he was trying to further elaborate and refine his arguments. I hope this is so.