SETI is looking for a signal that has two attributes: the type is known to be a product of human activity; it has never been observed in the absence of human activity. If such a signal is observed, the first thing that will happen is that efforts will be made to find a natural, non-human cause. Pulsars are a case in point.
ID has no algorithm for determining that a finite string is the result of an evolutionary algorithm or the result of divine intervention or the result of intervention by space aliens. We could detect strings in a genome that are inconsistent with common descent, and I can recall a few years ago, seeing predictions made on these threads that such strings would be found.
In fact, the opposite has been found. Molecular biology has uncovered vast arrays of data consistent with common descent, and nothing indicating intervention to produce a species that could not have evolved via descent with modification. No pig genes in the asparagus.
>> Molecular biology has uncovered vast arrays of data consistent with common descent, and nothing indicating intervention to produce a species that could not have evolved via descent with modification. <<
Wow, you might want to enter the 21st century. That notion was struck down a couple of decades ago.
[[ID has no algorithm for determining that a finite string is the result of an evolutionary algorithm or the result of divine intervention or the result of intervention by space aliens.]]
I said I wasn’t going to respond in this thread, but this is an interesting point- If ID doesn’t, then neither does Evolutionary science, so if Evolutiuon science is allowed to investigate an unknown, and to come to assumptive dirven ‘conclusions’, then by what unwritten law is ID then not allowed the same scientific endeavors? The fact is that Design in nature and biology is more than obvious, and that design then appears to be intelligently assembled, which is precisely what ID is all about- investigating HOW this factual design could have come to be- Evolution claims random mutations, mistakes in the genome, could result in this factual design, yet they can show no evidence to prove this, yet their statements are allowed and revered as science despite this serious lack of evidence, but yet ID is called a psuedoscience because it does EXACTLY the same thing eovlution science does? Investigates and coems to reasonable onclusions?
There is NO escaping the complete and utter hypocrisy that the secular scientific world is steeped in. To others in this thread who have suggested that ID is nothign more than a religious beleif- and you others to claim ID doesn’t perform legitimate science is a disingenious, misleading outright lie and just goes to show the blind willful ignorance of those opposed to ID science. 10 minutes on the internet will reveal more sicnetific studies being done in ID. No matter how many times you claim that, it can’t undo the fact that you are stone blind lying- either that or you truly are ignorant of what ID does and doesn’t do.