fallacycop writes:
(Please don't give me the silly ETdidit. it's even sillier then the godidit answer)
Actually, "ETdidit" is LESS silly than "Goddidit". The idea of "beings from another planet" is not only rather likely; from the viewpoint of another planet, say Mars, it is a certainty, even. After all, aren't we "extramartials"?
Since Mars and Earth are not particularly special in the grand scheme of things, it is highly likely that there must be life elsewhere in the universe. In fact, I think the universe must be teeming with life. It may not all be intelligent life, and perhaps intelligence is rather sparse in the universe (as it is on Earth and, dare I say, among humanity), but given the immensity of the universe I'll wager a case of Mouton Rothchild that they're out there, those little green men.
Climbing down from my off-topic soapbox now, and slightly raising my voice, it might be prudent to say something about codes.
I think DNA is indeed a code, but I don't think codes necessarily originate from a conscious mind, DNA being a case in point. But I'm not going to argue that, because others have done a fine job at that already.
The point I want to address is this: if there is intent behind the code of DNA, if it is a message, then isn't the message hopelessly corrupt by now? Was DNA originally a page of clear prose, now, with three and a half
billion years worth of mutations, it can be no more than a crumpled scrap of paper with some smudges on it. It may still be useful as a code, but it certainly isn't the original message anymore.
If anyone wants to maintain that there is conscious intent behind the message of DNA,
in its present state, then it might help them if they come forward with
present conscious intenders.
Edited by Parasomnium, : Spelling
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
™ Version 4.2