Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (dougp59 @ Nov. 03 2006,10:13)|
|What are they looking for in the data? An INFERENCE of intelligence, which would lead them to conclude an intelligence responsible for sending the obviously 'designed' message .|
(Recall the movie “Contact” with Jodie Foster.)
Question #2 If we are prepared to say that an inference of intelligence detected from far away originating radio waves must be proof of intelligent life (the designer of the radio signal), then why is an inference of intelligence in complex living systems here on earth not proof of an intelligent designer of that complex system?
Does this sound like a double standard?
According to the article SETI and Intelligent Design, the SETI project isn't searching for any messages:
|In fact, the signals actually sought by today’s SETI searches are not complex, as the ID advocates assume. We’re not looking for intricately coded messages, mathematical series, or even the aliens’ version of "I Love Lucy." Our instruments are largely insensitive to the modulation—or message—that might be conveyed by an extraterrestrial broadcast. A SETI radio signal of the type we could actually find would be a persistent, narrow-band whistle. Such a simple phenomenon appears to lack just about any degree of structure, although if it originates on a planet, we should see periodic Doppler effects as the world bearing the transmitter rotates and orbits.|
So, the SETI project is not looking for any "obviously 'designed' message", just something that's not known to have been produced by a natural source (all known natural radio sources are broad-band) and which produces a Doppler effect.
That is, the search isn't directed towards search for intelligence directly, only for something that is not known to have been produced naturally, and which might originate from a planet. That's all.
Complex living systems have been encountered here on earth; they are even produced naturally. Ok, maybe some invisible hand might have a rôle in the production of an embryo, but as far as empirical science can tell, it's all natural.