Re: The CSI Challenge of snex

On Jul 2, 2:41 pm, snex <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If I were an experimental physicist I could
probably come up with a radio equivalent of it.

If the *irregularities* of a radiosignal, as with the dots and dashes
of Morse Code, produced a long series of prime numbers or Pi or
something along these lines, you can bet such a finding would be
recognized by SETI scientists as clear evidence of artifact.

you do realize that every single finite sequence of numbers you can
come up with appears *somewhere* in pi, dont you?

Like the first 20 digits of pi repeated over and over by a radio
signal? For example, if the first 20 digits of pi were repeated over
and over again by a radio signal, or the first 20 prime numbers, how
many times would this have to happen before even you'd start to think
of the possibility of deliberate artifact?

You see, even though it is always possible that this specific matching
pattern could have been produced by a "fluke" non-deliberate
coincidence, the odds that this is in fact the case, vs. some form of
deliberate artifact, drop exponentially with each successful repeat of
the first 20 digits of pi.

The very same logic could be used if Gov. Schwarzenegger started
winning the California Lottery - one, two, three, four . . . times in
a row. How many times would he have to win before you'd start to
wonder if some sort of deliberate foul play wasn't involved? I mean
really, you could always argue that Arnold winning even 10 times in a
row could be the result of non-deliberate blind chance. And, you'd be
right - but what kind of predictive power would that hypothesis get
you over the long term?

And, that in a nutshell is why the detection of CSI is so useful for
those looking to detect ID - from forensics to SETI to anthropology to
the origins of life and its diversity.

Your "CSI Challenge" really doesn't amount to anything significant
with it comes to the predictive power of the ID hypothesis.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages