Re: Humans can't produce informationally complex DNA?

On Nov 17, 4:59 pm, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@naturalselection.
0catch.com> wrote:
On Nov 17, 3:41 pm, JohnStockwell<john.19071...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



After all,
SETI scientists say that the mechanism for production of the type of
radio signals they are looking for could be similar to the mechanisms
humans use to produce these types of radio signals. It's the same
basic argument.

Seti scientists have the mechanisms, they don't have the
signals.

That's irrelevant. They have a human mechanism and they have the
knowledge that non-deliberate natural processes are unlikely to
produce the signal in question. That's all you need to have to
adequately detect design in nature.

It's very relevant. They have a theory which generates models
of hypothetical signals, which they are then looking for. They
are not looking for "design" but for data that matches the
predictions of their theory.

IDers assert baldly and without evidence, in a way that is
indistinguishable from merely a statement of ignorance, that they
have the signals. They don't really have the mechanisms, nor
do they have any physical evidence.

We have a human mechanism - just like SETI has. And, we also have the
knowledge that no known non-deliberate force of nature comes remotely
close to doing what we humans can do with our mechanisms - just like
SETI. Again, that's all you need to support the design hypothesis on
the very same basis that SETI scientists do it.

Bull.
1) you make the assertion that beyond some line of 1000aa
it is "impossible for nature to do thus and such" That is
a bald assertion. You have absolutely nothing to establish
that position.
2) You have no theory that produces a model of what to look for
in biology




You see, ID would be like "bad SETI" if the SETI people asserted
that the preponderance of signals out there were artificial, and
made up ad hoc explanations for why the signals couldn't have
a natural origin, only *then* would ID asserters be doing the same
thing as SETI. ID would be "bad SETI".

LOL - The argument isn't that nature couldn't do the job. It is that
nature doesn't do the job and is unlikely to do the job based on
extensive research into the various potential non-deliberate natural
mechanisms. That's the basis of SETI and all other forms of useful ID
theories.

We don't understand enough about what nature can and cannot
do. SETI is not an ID theory, it is a scientific theory. There are
no ID theories, so far. There is no "extensive research" only
assertions.



-John

Sean Pitmanwww.DetectingDesign.com

John

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Humans cant produce informationally complex DNA?
    ... humans use to produce these types of radio signals. ... Seti scientists have the mechanisms, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Humans cant produce informationally complex DNA?
    ... The mechanism could be very similar to the mechanisms used by humans ... where's the physical evidence of this? ... humans use to produce these types of radio signals. ... Seti scientists have the mechanisms, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Humans cant produce informationally complex DNA?
    ... IDers assert baldly and without evidence, ... have the signals. ... They don't really have the mechanisms, ... We have a human mechanism - just like SETI has. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: SETI vs. ID
    ... SETI is looking very specifically for signals with characteristics of ... those of know artificial signals. ... can not violate the laws of nature. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: SETI and the Detection of ID
    ...  I've never said that the origin of just any DNA ... is if any non-intelligent force of nature ... Exclusion of non-ID mechanisms is never 100% - not even for SETI. ...
    (talk.origins)