Re: SETI and the Detection of ID

On Nov 19, 3:17 am, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 18, 11:53 pm, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@naturalselection.

0catch.com> wrote:
On Nov 18, 4:59 pm, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

there is no predictive value in ID, nor is it a hypothesis. a failed
idea is not a hypothesis any more than a corpse is a ballet dancer.

SETI is based on an ID theory.

actually, it's not.

no SETI scientist...none....says intelligence created a feature of
nature like creationists are saying about the feature of nature called
'life'.

SETI scientist are indeed arguing that a feature of nature in the form
of certain types of radio signals is always the result of intelligent
creation.

SETI modifies a natural product. DNA IS a natural product.

The search for ETI does not modify anything.  It evaluates radio
signals for features that go well beyond known non-deliberate non-
intelligent natural productions while being within at least human-
level creative potential.

?? really? ETI invented electromagnetism? every time i watch
'trublood' on TV do I have to pay royalties to the ETI that invented
electromagetism?

A specific type of radio signal is only created or "invented" by
intelligent design - yes. We aren't just talking about any type of
radio signal here. We're talking about specific types of radio
signals.

The same is true of DNA. We aren't just talking about just any type
of DNA sequence here. We're talking about specific types of DNA
sequences. The first production of DNA on this planet has nothing to
do with if certain forms of DNA can or cannot be produced by known
forces of nature.

the origin of life is unknown. it's YOUR contention that we know
enough about the origins of DNA to rule out natural processes, yet you
spew your frustration at scientists for doing basic research in this
very area why would scientists do basic research in an area
that's so mature we can rule out the very processes
they're investigating?

If SETI scientists did find a radio signal that they claimed was
clearly artifactual, many other scientists would start trying to
falsify that claim as well - by looking for various non-intelligent
natural processes that might be able to do the job. That's how
science works. The attempt to falsify a hypothesis is part of the
whole process of science. All scientific hypotheses are open to
potential falsification and should be continually evaluated and tested
over time. However, until the hypothesis is actually falsified, the
claims of the hypothesis remain the most reasonable explanation of the
available facts until it is actually falsified.

This is precisely why a fair number of famous scientists and
mathematicians, to include several Nobel Prize winners, have publicly
supported various hypotheses of a intelligent origin for life on this
planet. This wouldn't be possible the basic ID hypothesis behind the
origin for life had actually been falsified. Just because there are
attempts still underway to try and falsify the basic ID hypothesis for
life doesn't mean it has actually been falsified or that any other
hypothesis offers a better explanation of the available facts so far
discovered.

Certain types of DNA sequences cannot be produced by this or any other
non-ID method.  Human-designed sequence tags, for example, cannot be
produced by RM/NS.  And, there are other features in the same category
- like systems with functional complexity beyond the 1000aa threshold
level - i.e., systems that require at least 1000 fairly specified
amino acid residues working together at the same time.  These systems
have not been observed to be produced by RM/NS and statistically very
very unlikely to be produced by this non-ID natural mechanism this
side of trillions upon trillions of years of time.

i've already given you the benefit of the doubt for the sake of
argument: i'll stipulate RM/NS can not create DNA that codes for aa
chains>1000.

that, however, is not a mechanism. you seem to think that the rules of
logic say that ONLY 2 ideas exist: we KNOW that a natural process is
involved OR god did it. if we dont know the former then the latter is
automatically true

What is true is that no *known* non-intelligent mechanism can do the
job while a known intelligence-driven mechanisms (like human design)
can do the job. That is what is known so far. Could there be some as
yet unknown non-deliberate non-intelligent force of nature that could
do the job? You betcha. Has such a force actually been found as of
today? Nope. So, as of today, what is the very best scientific
hypothesis that we have to explain the available facts? ID. That's
it. That is why a number of famous scientists do actually support the
ID hypothesis for the origin of life on this planet.

and that is NOT how science is done. sorry. you're not a scientist and
you're pushing religion.

This is exactly how science is done. You don't just assume some
default theory, like non-deliberate non-intelligent "naturedidit"
without any positive evidence whatsoever - especially when the only
known forces that can produce a given phenomenon are intelligence-
driven on at least the human level of intelligence and creativity.

sean is trying to use the most used failed idea in history. it's been
tried for 2000 years and it's ALWAYS been wrong always.

SETI is based on an ID hypothesis - as are many other scientific
disciplines.  

wrong. SETI is based on the principle that intelligence knows how to
use features of nature to express intelligence. it is NOT based on the
idea that intelligence knows how to CREATE features of nature like
life.

I'm sorry, but this paragraph makes no sense. SETI is the "search for
extreterrestrial intelligence". How can someone search for
intelligence without an ID hypothesis? - a hypothesis of what to
expect when you find the work of intelligence vs. non-intelligent
natural productions?

BIG BIG difference.

your idea....that there are intelligence processes in nature...has
ALWAYS been wrong. every time a new discovery has been made in
science, you creationists crawl out of your coffins, dragging your
stinking, dead, putrid corpse of the most failed idea in history, and
try it ONE MORE TIME.

Humans are both intelligent and natural. How then can you argue that
there are are no intelligence-driven processes in nature?

you're leaving body parts all over history.  your idea has ALWAYS been
wrong. for 2000 years it's been wrong. that's why science exists: if
'god did it' could explain nature, scientists would use it.
we don't. your idea is wrong.

"IDdidit" vs. "non-IDdidit" is used all the time in science.
Otherwise, there would be no SETI, anthropology, forensics, etc.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Multi-Protein Machines, Sequence Space & Possible vs. Likely
    ... of ID detection for forensics, anthropology, and even SETI. ... researched so natural processes can't be excluded. ... that nature could use the processes ventor's company used to create ... scientists are proposing to do and are doing. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: SETI and the Detection of ID
    ... nature like creationists are saying about the feature of nature called ... signals for features that go well beyond known non-deliberate non- ... enough about the origins of DNA to rule out natural processes, ... why would scientists do basic research in an area that's so mature we ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Summary: Nested hierarchy and Common Descent
    ... Neither do SETI scientists - beyond the fact that the ETI they are ... radio waves are governed by the laws of nature. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A Follow up to Kermits: "The Missing Universe Museum"
    ... what single thing, in 2000 years, did creationism get right in ... explaining the features of nature? ... scientists answer 15 questions. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: In the News: Expelled Exposes Plight of Darwin Doubters
    ... first language, and I think that is where the problem lies. ... Scientists use ... Natural selection can only explain strictly biological features of ... advantage of a neighbouring environment or a new food source. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading