What can be said of Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution in the dusk of 2009, fifty year after its original publication? Is it a terrible book?
There is some evidence that once again, the diapason of opinion is being changed. The claims of intelligent design are too insistent and too plausible to be frivolously dismissed.
Dr. Marks is obviously right. A sculpture has more information than the raw material from which the image was sculpted.
Whether your dog can philosophize is not a puzzle you need to look to the Oxford English Dictionary to resolve.
Egnor he nails it by noting that Shallit, not uniquely, falls victim to the mereological fallacy.