Re: Blueprints vs. Bricks and Mortar

On Nov 20, 10:06 pm, Seanpit <sean...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 20, 6:46 pm, "Steven L." <sdlit...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Seanpit wrote:
On Nov 19, 7:59 am, hersheyh <hershe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And if such a thing were discovered inside our own human DNA, especially
if it were discovered inside a sequence conserved from ancient life
forms, it would be compelling evidence for ID.
But no such thing has been discovered.
Well, as long as we agree that if such a feature could be demonstrated
in DNA then the same basic argument used by SETI scientists would
support the hypothesis that such a feature would be good evidence of
deliberate artifact, then we can move on to potential candidate
features . . .
Of course, no such signal (an otherwise useless sequence order that
'just happens' to mimic the sequence of numbers of pi in a decimal
number system -- if God has 12 fingers, what would pi look like?... or
English words) would survive intact for even a few million years given
neutral drift. Finding such a sequence in an organism today would be
more likely due to a prank by modern humans than a bar code insert by
God.

No one is arguing for God here. You could argue that such obvious
tags, if ever discovered in a particular genome were likely inserted
by human design - and that would be reasonable given the close
proximity of human designers. However, even the argument that some
ETI did the job in fairly recent history is better than the argument
that some non-intelligent force of nature did the job.

It is very similar to the suggestion of some that unusual weather
patterns or other unknown forces of non-intelligent nature were likely
responsible for the initial appearance of intricate geometric crop
circles in England. Even those proposing that intelligent aliens were
likely responsible were more logical that those proposing some form of
non-intelligent nature.

Of course, human designers were obviously the most likely candidates
given the close proximity of intelligent humans to these crop
circles. However, if some similar patterns were found etched into the
dust of the surface of Mars or any other alien planet, it would still
be far more logical to propose an ETI than to pre-suppose that some as
yet unknown non-intelligent force of nature likely did the job.

It's funny that you've chosen this example.

The reason that an artificial origin makes sense for the crop circles is
that they are *circles*. We're accustomed to intelligent beings
(ourselves) drawing circles.

That's not enough. We also know that non-intelligent natural
processes don't produce intricate geometric designs in crops. Both
elements are needed to detect true artifacts.

To detect "true artefacts" we need to have a canonical set of
observations that allow a law to be formulated that will permit
us to know the process of origin. It is not about mere pattern
recognition. Natural systems, do indeed produce symmetric
and geometrical forms. It is the question of establishing
the physical processes by which those patterns form.

Intelligence doesn't make crop circles. What makes crop circles
or any other artefact is a manufacturing process, which is
established by experimentation coupled with information
from the presumed artefact that said process has actually
been employed.



As it turned out, the crop circles were hoaxes. Now if the hoaxers had
chosen to trace out some weird wiggly curve familiar only to themselves,
rather than a pure circle, it might be much harder to suspect that the
crop patterns were due to intelligent design. Because we would have no
"control" to compare the curves to.

This isn't the reason. The reason why wiggly curves would be harder
to detect as true artifacts is because non-intelligent natural
processes tend to produce features that lack high-geometric symmetry -
- i.e., like random appearing "wiggly curves".


The clues to the process of origin are contained in the object.
So, no, it would make no difference whether the crop damage
was symmetric or not. The same auxilliary evidence for the
process of origin (disturbance of the ground, degree of bending
of the grain stalks, directions of bending and the like) is
the clue to the process of origin.


-John

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Blueprints vs. Bricks and Mortar
    ... that they are *circles*. ... some sort but by no known non-intelligent force of nature of any ... characteristic of a given manufacturing process it is quite possible ... Only intelligent-driven mechanisms do make intricate geometric crop ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Blueprints vs. Bricks and Mortar
    ... that they are *circles*. ... some sort but by no known non-intelligent force of nature of any ... Only intelligent-driven mechanisms do make intricate geometric crop ... No non-intelligent force of nature is able to do so. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: When DID agriculture start?
    ... circles in arid regions with a flat topography. ... The topic under discussion was crop circles, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: 8 Bit Random Numbers
    ... sequence is equal to 2^n, and the output of the device is truly linear. ... It isn't about whether it's desirable, it's whether it's an LFSR. ... arrow from each state bubble to the next. ... feeding loops, isolated circles, much cool stuff. ...
    (sci.electronics.basics)
  • Re: 8 Bit Random Numbers
    ... sequence is equal to 2^n, and the output of the device is truly linear. ... It isn't about whether it's desirable, it's whether it's an LFSR. ... arrow from each state bubble to the next. ... feeding loops, isolated circles, much cool stuff. ...
    (sci.electronics.basics)
Loading