Re: Chez Watt: Re: Double Standard on SETI vs DNA-ID (was: Definition Challenge)

topmind wrote:
bryce.topmind.jacobs@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
If you'd like to see some new arguments, address your own failings.

So you admit to unnecessary repetition? That is a start.

Clearly your few days off didn't improve your reading comprehension.

There is no need to come up with new refutations of your nonsense
because you never address those that have already been provided. In
true Ferrous Cranus fashion, you simply repeat your bogus assertions ad
nauseum.

For example, how exactly do you go from the Bryce Jacobs DNA-ID
non-hypothesis:
"Some being or beings may have manipulated some genome or genomes on
Earth at some point in time in the recent or deep past and may have
left some unknown pattern encoded in some unknown fashion using some
unknown technique for some unknown purpose. Maybe."

That is your characteristic, not mine.

You have never provided an alternative. This summary is based directly
on your postings in this newsgroup. If you had a real hypothesis,
you'd have produced it by now.

SETI's could be worded the same way.

You've said this before and it was a lie then, too. The hypothesis
being tested by the SETI radiotelescope project has been supplied to
you repeatedly. It is precise, specific, and falsifiable. Your vague
speculations are not.

to your "prediction":
There are primes encoded in Earth genomes (other than e. coli, darn
that Zacriel for actually looking) using the translation A = 00, C =
01, G = 10, T = 11.

Again, the base mapping is one of 96 other possible encodings (if we
include forward-backward). I didn't say it had to only be that mapping.

(That's 95 others, Prime Boy.) Even with your modification, it is a
non sequitur. There is no logical means of arriving at this
"prediction" from your non-hypothesis.

Describe the basis for every assumption that changes your vague
speculations into something falsifiable and predictive.

I will assume you are asking why aliens would use primes to
communicate.

Then you'd be wrong. That is only a very small part of the issue.
Before you can make predictions based on your non-hypothesis, you have
to do the work of making it a testable, falsifiable scientific
hypothesis. If you want to use SETI as your model, you need to specify
exactly what assumptions you are making at every point and exactly why
you are making them. Mark VandeWettering provided an excellent example
of the empirical basis and empirically-based assumptions underlying the
hypothesis being tested by the SETI radiotelescope project:

"The hypothetical assumptions that underly the radio search for SETI
are that technological socities will use radio to communicate, as we
do. That they will be able to generate signals of comparable or
greater power than we can. That they will be scanning the heavens with
radio telescopes, as we do. That they will notice that there is a
region of the microwave spectrum which is lower in noise. That
contained within this band is the emission line for hydrogen, the most
common and lightweight element. That at a higher frequency is the
strongest emission line for the OH. That the signals they are likely
to use will be simple narrow band carriers, because they are easier to
detect. That these carriers will likely be Doppler shifted, since they
will originate from planetary bodies rather than stars.

These are a lot of assumptions, but the empirical consequence of
assuming these are that we should be able to test to see if these
assumptions hold: we can scan the heavens on a wide variety of
frequencies, looking for narrowband carriers within the target
frequencies."

It will take an even longer chain of assumptions to get from your
non-hypothesis to any predictions. Let's see it.

BJ

----
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/dfa00a58f25f28ac:
topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
| First make a list of the first 500 prime numbers:
| A: 1, 3, 7, 11, 13, 17, 29 .....

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Arthur, King of Time and Space and ToE vs ID
    ... "There are no known sequential prime digits (as defined by encoding ... predictions the failure of which would serve to falsify it. ... How would a failure of any of those predictions falsify your ... left some unknown pattern encoded in some unknown fashion using some ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Double Standard, softy on SETI (was: Definition Challenge)
    ... statistical outliers as significant as those related to base-4 prime ... testable predictions the failure of which would serve to falsify it. ... What empirical observations lead to your hypothesis? ... left some unknown pattern encoded in some unknown fashion using some ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: New Sputnik Documentary
    ... since even the nodal regression rate was unknown until actually observed and measured. ... By November, though, predictions for Sputnik-2 were close enough to make it worth ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: New Sputnik Documentary
    ... since even the nodal regression rate was unknown until actually observed ... By November, though, predictions for Sputnik-2 were close enough to make ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)