Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihnet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad
From: eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: codes,designs,creation,intelligence
Message-ID: <250@ihnet.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 02:24:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihnet.250
Posted: Thu Jul 11 02:24:52 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 04:16:31 EDT
References: <32500041@uiucdcsb>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 57

> A few weeks back on CNN, there was a little story on SETI, the
> Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence.
>     SETI claims they can recognize a designed object, i.e., one which
> requires intelligence (the I in SETI).  Note that this is not due to any
> inherent properties in the object itself.  The designed object will be some
> pattern of electromagnetic frequency in a sea of random electromagnetic fre-
> quencies.  It must be, therefore, be due solely to the nature of the pattern
> itself, i.e., a code carrying some information.  Yet not a week goes by on this
> net that we don't hear evolutionists tell us they can't recognize evidence of
> design and intelligence.  They tell us this, of course, only when it's
> convenient, in other words, when they're talking to creationists.  When
> they're working on SETI, or looking for arrowheads made out of rocks just like
> all the other rocks lying on the ground, or noticing the difference between a
> sandcastle on a beach and the patterns waves make on that same beach, then -
> well, even a child can recognize that which took creative thought and that
> which natural processes can produce.
> If SETI were to pick up such a transmission of E. coli DNA patterns,
> it would be trivial to recognize, and no doubt the High Priest of Evolution,
> Carl Sagan, would say: "Aha!  We have evidence of an intelligent designer,
> which we have not seen directly, but must exist."  So when that same Carl
> Sagan sees E. coli here on earth, along with vastly more advanced forms of
> life expressing codes we haven't even begun to decipher, must less design
> ourselves (simply expressed in a chemical rather than electronic alphabet)
> what does he say?  "Evolution is a fact - like apples falling off trees."
> 
> P.S.  I'll put the shoe on the other foot now:  Would some evolutionist on the
> net care to give us a definition of design which would allow SETI to recognize
> created patterns but would differentiate against those patterns found here on
> earth evolutionists claim to be produced only by natural processes?  Well?????
> A. Ray Miller

This is an intelligent question, demanding a good answer.
I am not sure I am qualified to suply one, but here goes.
If the members of SETI claim to have a flawless test for "design",
they are as wrong as many creationists.
There is no double standard here.
I believe the members of SETI would, in fact, claim that they are
searching for "probable" evidence of intelligent design.
After all, if you were searching for extra terrestrial intelligence,
you wouldn't scan every micro second of arc in the intergalactic void.
Instead, you would search for events that "appear" to indicate intelligence.
Upon closer investigation, you might be right or wrong.
Indeed, when the first pulsars were discovered,
some scientists became quite excited, thinking that the periodic
electromagnetic emissions indicated intelligent design.
Closer observation refuted this theory, and disappointed many.
Similarly, SETI may discover electromagnetic signals that "appear" designed.
Next time, they might be right, and it might lead to life;
or they might be wrong, and it still might lead to life.
Sagans is not at all inconsistent, although he may not
have chosen his words carefully; a mistake we have all made.
I hope this explains things.
I will address the other, not so intelligent, falacies in your
article later.
-- 
main(){  printf("I believe I have free will, therefore I must.");  }
Karl Dahlke    ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad