Compare and Contrast ID and SETI

This is off the top of my head but, if needed, we can dig deeper into it.To get this started maybe we can consider what I think SETI is trying to do.First they have a wide range of samples of what are taken as non-designed signels (as noted above). So they are looking for something "different" in some way.However, what differences count?First an understanding of natural processes allows the exclusion of some signels.. The famous LGM signel of 1968 (IIRC) was quickly relegated to natural when an explanation of it was figured out (actually, IIRC the explanation already existed they just had to tie them together).I know that one idea is to use a series of prime numbers as a strong indicator of intelligence since no one has figured out a natural process to produce that.At this point those familiar with biology and evolution will recognize the contrast with ID.

So?That is a pretty simple thing and not terrible meaningful. Is that it?But the differences are there too. The ID folk seem to accept any pattern as meaningful or at least have no way of distinguishing which are and are not.The SETI folks are very, very fussy about what might constitute a real signel.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 06-04-2005 09:00 PM

Well, a number of us have read something on the subject and I suggest that they do not have anything that stands up to scrutiny. All that anyone has presented here or referenced is junk calculations of probabilities.It may be relevant here but it will take us down a path that has been covered elsewhere and this thread will lose focus. I suggest, it you thing there the work has been done, that you go to one of the other ID threads and tell us about it. Perhaps there is something new.

Well thank you for manageing it. Now if you would enlighten us on what the assertions and evidences are that would also be polite. Oh, so we are to look for prime numbers in the DNA? The principle is no big deal. How it is enacted is. Care to give an example?This message has been edited by NosyNed, 06-04-2005 10:19 PM

Not as far as I can tell. It seems there are a lot of different ID ideas. Some seem to suggest that almost ALL life evolved through darwinian mechanisms with only a few places that don't seem to them to be possible. Others seem to just be talking about the first "life". Others just don't seem to be clear on which bits they do mean.I think a contrast between which are and are not intelligently designed would be helpful at this point. I'm sure CodeTrainer will enlighten us on this since he is the expert in ID and we are not.