quote:

I was curious what everyone on this board thought of the prospect of other civilizations out there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:StephenJ

quote:

I was curious what everyone on this board thought of the prospect of other civilizations out there.

It's irrelevant.

quote:

In what way would it be irrelevant? Can you think of anything more relevant?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
Personally, I wonder if life is the product of fairly straightforward natural processes why it only seems to have occurred here.

quote:

Come on Jhud, you know the answer to this one.
S.E.T.I. can only detect intelligent life. More specifically, it can only detect intelligent life broadcasting in specific wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum.
Even if life were to occur on one planet in every solar system, there's no way of telling if any of them would ever achieve the kind of intelligence necessary to create radio technology. Cognitive intelligence isn't necessarily a survival trait to be favored. Not to side with CognitiveMagic, but it's possible that a technical society will tend to destroy itself. If this is true, there may only be brief (100 or so year) period of radio transmission from any intelligent civilization before it kills itself. Among the vast number of species, extinct and extant, to exist on earth, only one has ever achieved radio technology. If life is fairly rare, and intelligence even rarer, there may not exist an intelligent species within our ability to detect them. Not to mention that we've only been monitoring for a short while.

There may be life everywhere, but we won't know unless it's broadcasting in specific frequencies, or we gain intersystem space travel.

quote:

In what way would it be irrelevant? Can you think of anything more relevant?

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL: xc279

quote:

In what way would it be irrelevant? Can you think of anything more relevant?

Jack did a good job of answering.
However, your questions indicate you take the S.E.T.I. program quite seriously making you the ideal person to ask. What would S.E.T.I. consider as indisputable evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence?

quote:

A clearly artificial signal from a clearly non terrestrial source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
What in yor opinion would allow us to distinguish a artificial signal from the regular radio signals that pervade space?

quote:

Well, if we picked up 'leaked' radio signals from another civilization, they should be readily apparent. If humanity is any indication of what types of signals will leak from a technologically capable planet, then voices and organized data would be the majority of what leaks. SETI@home "searches for four types of signals that distinguish them from noise: signals:
* Spikes in power spectra
* Gaussian rises and falls in transmission power, possibly representing the telescope beam's main lobe passing over a radio source
* Triplets — three power spikes in a row
* Pulsing signals that possibly represent a narrowband digital-style transmission"

For an example, one candidate was "Radio source SHGb02+14a is a source and a candidate in the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI), discovered on March 2003 by SETI@home and announced in New Scientist on September 1, 2004.

The source was observed three times at a frequency of about 1420 MHz, which is expected to be a frequency used by extraterrestrials due to its proximity to one of the main frequencies at which hydrogen absorbs and radiates photons."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

So you are suggesting that signals produced by human technologies are a valid basis for detecting an alien intelligence?

quote:

Human technologies produce many kinds of signals. Some are no different from noise, some have a non-noisy signal. Natural phenomena also produce both noisy and non-noisy signals. Something that would be really convincing would be the analog of the ham-radio frequencies that carry audio of people reciting numbers. Although it would be better still if the message were not just mysterious, but actually conveyed a message we could decipher.

quote:

quote:

What would S.E.T.I. consider as indisputable evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence?

A clearly artificial signal from a clearly non terrestrial source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Human technologies produce many kinds of signals. Some are no different from noise, some have a non-noisy signal. Natural phenomena also produce both noisy and non-noisy signals. Something that would be really convincing would be the analog of the ham-radio frequencies that carry audio of people reciting numbers. Although it would be better still if the message were not just mysterious, but actually conveyed a message we could decipher.

That wasn't an answer to the question - the question was, are signals produced by human technologies are a valid basis for detecting an alien intelligence?

quote:

'm not sure I quite understand your question. IF we received a radio signal (of extraterrestrial origin) that just happened to be an NTSC TV signal carrying video of Desperate Alien Housewives, this would be a valid basis for inferring an alien intelligence (if not taste). Other possibilities that are 'unlike' human technologies are also possible.

quote:

I know where your garden path is leading, so to skip to the ending, the analogy between biochemistry and human technology remains unconvincing.

quote:

This invalidates the argument that IDists can't infer the activities of other intelligences by the activity of human intelligence. Intelligence is intelligence.

quote:

Apparently the logic is convincing to SETI scientists as they have invested their careers in it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:Jhud

quote:

This invalidates the argument that IDists can't infer the activities of other intelligences by the activity of human intelligence. Intelligence is intelligence.

Thanks Jack. That’s the point I was after. It is proper to consider DNA an encrypted code, is it not?
I suppose it is asking too much to expect any of the ID deniers here to admit to the obvious.

quote:

Apparently the logic is convincing to SETI scientists as they have invested their careers in it.

Looks like S.E.T.I. needs to be labeled religion so it can be banned from public schools. After all NOTHING that has the potential of casting doubt on atheist dogma can be tolerated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

'm not sure I quite understand your question. IF we received a radio signal (of extraterrestrial origin) that just happened to be an NTSC TV signal carrying video of Desperate Alien Housewives, this would be a valid basis for inferring an alien intelligence (if not taste). Other possibilities that are 'unlike' human technologies are also possible.

So then the answer is yes, that comparisons with human technologies are valid for evaluating that something is the product of intelligence.

In fact, SETI is primarily based on that notion; that radio technologies similar to our own would be an expected means of communication by an alien intelligence.

This invalidates the argument that IDists can't infer the activities of other intelligences by the activity of human intelligence. Intelligence is intelligence.

quote:

I know where your garden path is leading, so to skip to the ending, the analogy between biochemistry and human technology remains unconvincing.

Apparently the logic is convincing to SETI scientists as they have invested their careers in it.

quote:

Damn, I guess I need to send out a memo to all the other members of the vast atheist conspiracy. After all, if we detect any radio noise, it should automatically be assumed to be designed by God. This stands in direct contrast to atheistic materialism that has hi-jacked science. We can't have that.

quote:

The difference here is that the origins (and designers, if you will) are much more well understood than with organic life. We know exactly what kind of signals known designers produce, and what kind of signals are likely to be produced by nature. Based on this knowledge we can distinguish between the two. We don't have anywhere near the amount of knowledge of life's origins to make such distinctions in regards to life.

quote:

It should also be noted that part of the criteria for detecting 'designed' radio signals as a product of intelligence is a lack of complexity... which stands in stark contrast to Behe's ideas on complexity and design.

quote:

Well alot of scientest figure that the laws of physics are universal. So an alien society may, through independant invention, figure out a way to send messages that our similar to our broadcasting technology.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
Actually, the only knowledge we have in regards to what signals ‘designers’ produce is what signals we (as humans) produce. We infer that other intelligent beings would do the same – and that is a good inference.

Of course, we didn’t produce radio signals at all 200 hundred years ago, so such an inference couldn’t be made, but as our technology grew more sophisticated, so did our range of knowledge of what intelligence is capable of.

quote:


And that, in a nutshell, is why ID has come of age; because humans finally know that an intelligence can produce and manipulate encoded information via DNA, because we can.

quote:


Actually, no. While such signals are easy to describe, they are not easy to produce, which is where complexity comes in – though not irreducible complexity a la Behe, but specific complexity a la Dembski – that is that the specific signal is improbable based on the complex means needed to generate it.