Posted on 11/24/2008 9:34:07 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Frank Drake is being honored on Space.com by the SETI Institute as the “Father of SETI,” His reputation is providing an opportunity for a fund raiser. For a lot of money, you can spend time with a celebrity whose accomplishments are questionable...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Ping!
I see nothing wrong with such efforts. The fact that SETI has not found anything doesn't mean that its contribution is zero. It means that we know that even a concentrated effort to monitor all wave lengths for intelligent communication has not discovered a meaningful message. Research for an Alzheimer's cure has produced nothing that has reduced the severity of the disease, but should we take that to mean we should stop such research? If SETI can find funding for its efforts, I hope they continue their work. Given that the universe is 13.4 billion years old, signals from the far side of the known universe could take billions of years to get here. The fact I will never hear them does not make the effort to discover them unwarranted.
==I see nothing wrong with such efforts.
I don’t either. But if science is about results, not just hot air, it would seem that his celebrity status is a bit premature.
==Given that the universe is 13.4 billion years old, signals from the far side of the known universe could take billions of years to get here.
That is materialistic assumption not warranted by the existing data.
Again, I disagree. Drake at least thought about the problem long enough to get the scientific community to consider his equation. At least that's a starting point for discussion and he deserves to be lauded for it.
That is materialistic assumption not warranted by the existing data.
Not sure what you are arguing here: That the universe is 13.4 billion years old or that signals from the far side could take billions of years to get here. From what I've read, the scientific community agrees on the age of the universe. Given the Earth is a little over 4 billion years old, it seems reasonable to be to assume that other galaxies in the universe are older than the Milky Way, leaving about a 9 billion year window for some other civilization to be more advanced than we are. However, assuming the speed of light is fixed (at least past the point of Singularity), it could take billions of years to get a signal from one of these "early" galaxies.
SETI is NOT science if you are attempting to be an honest evolutionist. Which is it for you?
Raise Money by Accomplishing Nothing (where do I sign up!)
ooooooppss....I thought the Obama Presidential Campaign was hiring again.
Thanks for the ping!
“Raise Money by Accomplishing Nothing (where do I sign up!)”
I hear they’re hiring.
Why not?
Ooooo.....ZING!
On a side note, SETI has been around a while, I remember doing a report on them back in high school about 10 years ago. Very interesting stuff if nothing else.
Because ID and SETI are exactly the mathematics. However, for SETI, organization in a much simplier “radio wave” is an AUTOMATIC indication of design; yet there is NO acceptable level of organization (complexity) within any living body for which the evolutionist would be willing to apply Probability Theory.
In other words, Probability Theory will NEVER be allowed to be applied to any component of a living organism, no matter how complex the design, because they all know that life DESIGNED itself through evolution. Therefore, how could any of these scientists make the argument that probability theory is to be applied to radio waves (in ordered signals), but can NEVER to life itself.
In other words, if you believe life designed itself, why couldn’t an radio wave also have designed itself or have become ordered when it passed through such-and-such or because of mother nature or whatever?
Your definition of an evolutionist is little to narrow for me. Probability theory can be applied to an organism as long as there is some positive probability that the theory can be falsified. I might, for example, construct a theory that all humans are born with two arms and two legs, which is normally the case. Sadly, however, there are times when the theory breaks and the hypothesis is falsified. In my mind, therefore, I could be an evolutionist but still subscribe to probability theory.
Truly one of the greatest scams of all time; listening for what common sense says is not there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.