Re: SETI and the Detection of ID

On Nov 21, 3:15 pm, Seanpit <sean...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 20, 3:49 pm, hersheyh <hershe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

< snip >

That's the SETI argument in a nutshell.  This very same argument can
be used to say, "Of those ND-forces of nature that we do know about,
none come remotely close to producing certain types of DNA sequences
that we know at least human-level intelligence can and does
produce".

No. In the case of the DNA sequences, we *know* that they came into
existence at a time and place when humans did not exist and no other
known intelligent agent did either.

You see, it is just as I said.  Your argument rules out even the
possibility of detecting ETI or ETI activity on this planet or
anywhere else in the universe if the ETI did anything before humans
are though to have existed.  That's a very silly argument.  
If ETIs
cam to this planet and built a pyramid or something equivalent before
humans existed here and we subsequently discovered it (like under the
Antarctic Ice for example), you'd argue that it couldn't be recognized
as a non-human artifact because it is on this planet and humans
couldn't have made it.  

My argument is that DNA, by itself, is a very poor artifact to use
given that genomes change all the time and ratchet mutational changes
to adapt genes to local conditions. *If* you had *any* other evidence
of the existence of your hypothetical invisible intelligence at the
appropriate time and place, that would actually strengthen your
argument.

Otherwise you do have to explain how your hypothetical intelligent
agency could exist for the hundreds of millions (if not billions) of
years needed to introduce all those "1000aa" systems at different
times and places without leaving *any* trace other than those
systems. That would be like finding automobiles but no roads, houses,
factories, or any other evidence of a technological civilization. It
simply doesn't differ from "magical poofing" by a "magical entity".
Especially since we *know* of mechanisms that can change organisms and
their genomes so as to adapt better to changed conditions. Your claim
is not that such mechanisms don't exist, but only that, because you
(personally) have not seen any evidence that you are willing to accept
of that mechanism producing a certain level of change in 50 years,
that it is impossible for the mechanism to produce it no matter how it
is broken down into smaller steps. That is an opinion, not evidence.

What kind of nonsense argument is that?  Of
course we would all quickly recognize it as the result of a very
smart, creative non-human intelligence. Even you would accept it as
such.

It tells me that DNA and biological systems do not even meet the same
criteria of sufficient knowledge about how such systems are made by
technological societies requiring a designer/manufacturing process
that a pyramid does. Certainly we have no evidence of any of the types
of manufacturing processes that humans would require (but amoeba don't
require) in making other amoeba. But if you do find those "bar-code"
messages that have no utility other than to tell us that the system
was designed by an intelligence, you can get back to me.

Sorry, but your whole line of reasoning here simply doesn't hold
water.

< snip rest >

Sean Pitmanwww.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Harshman, Felsenstein & Dembski
    ... intelligence or above" created DNA above OR below the 1000fsar ... perform something is not evidence that there were ancient human-like ... observed humans creating DNA, his theory is not just merely even less ... that evolving such societies leave. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: topmind: ID is potentially testable
    ... we do have the analogy with humans. ... Actually it is similar to the definition of God issue. ... Ape DNA to produce humans. ... Unless perhaps the God or God-claimant gives us evidence. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: topmind: ID is potentially testable
    ... we do have the analogy with humans. ... Actually it is similar to the definition of God issue. ... Ape DNA to produce humans. ... Unless perhaps the God or God-claimant gives us evidence. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: topmind: ID is potentially testable
    ... we do have the analogy with humans. ... Actually it is similar to the definition of God issue. ... Ape DNA to produce humans. ... don't start from puzzling evidence in need of explanation, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The HP Way
    ... There are many mechanisms for making random changes, and there are many mechanisms for limiting those changes. ... But there is no evidence, anywhere, of any sort of "higher order" controlling intelligence - all changes are random. ... The point of all the control mechanisms is to allow small random changes while having minimal chances of ending up with something completely broken. ... It makes perfect sense that radiation, chemicals and copying errors can create random changes in DNA. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
Loading