Detecting Design

Hi Coyote,I was going to mention glacial erratics as well. They can be quite large and far from their original source/s. Basalt commonly forms hexagonal patterns as it cools, and you can see evidence of this type of formation in many canyon walls and remnant cone cores, like Devil's Monument.One thing to be wary of is attributing glacier scouring marks to be marks of the stones being intentionally cut.I'd say no one characteristic from such a list as given above is sufficient, and even two is dubious.There are also a lot of stone monoliths distributed around norther europe, some that show evidence of being worked and erected, others not so clear.Is a "possible design" inference more or less likely if there is just one example or if there are numerous examples?Enjoy.

---

Hi Tanndarr, The article seems to be about how to tell them apart if you have sufficient information\evidence. One of the criteria was how the bones were treated by the collectors:

quote:

---

3) the tendency for bones from hyena accumulations to have relatively complete shafts but lack epiphyses (i.e., being bone "cylinders") while those from hominid accumulations have broken shafts and intact epiphyses;

---

Seems fairly straightforward. Of course it is more difficult when you don't have known examples of an unspecified designers preferences compared to a natural process that produces similar artifacts.Enjoy.

---

Thanks Coyote. One problem I have is that design may be only a singular event. Things I have designed over 10 years ago are still being made, and I've seen some recent examples even though I've moved hundreds of miles from the point of original design, and the manufacturing has since moved as well. This makes tying the objects to the design difficult, and all you have then is the artifact. But do you really have evidence of design, or of manufacture that copies a design? Hexagonal. Note glacial scouring of tops.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : picEdited by RAZD, : last

Hi Tanndarr, Yes, ego, and to some extent confirmation bias, plays a role (see Bluejay's thread One's Own Theory). Gould and Dawkins is another example It's in the abstract (see bottom of webpage for copyable text). Yep, and they have the jaws to chew the ends, humans don't. There are several other differences noted.

---

Hi Coyote, some additional thoughts. Would that include points like the following: If they are completely out of context?Enjoy

---

Hi Coyote, And yet we see designed artifacts that have used points like this: The wood and fiber structure could have decayed away and you would be left with a set of sorted points.enjoy.

---

Perhaps now is a good time to recap where at we are at, if I can paraphrase statements:

Message 1, Message 3:
1. There is secondary evidence of the Designer at work.
2. We can clearly identify purpose/s for the artifact.
3. Artifacts show evidence of secondary work or wear.
4. Artifacts are co-located with other artifacts showing similar traits.
5. Artifacts are co-located with debris from manufacture.
6. Use of artifacts may leave evidence of use on other objects.
   Message 6
   
7. Artifacts are well formed.
8. Artifacts show multi-layered evidence of being made.
   Message 5
   
9. Secondary aging and natural wear/decay of artifact or parts of artifact needs to be considered to consider a theoretical as-designed artifact(mt rushmore example)
   Message 7
   
10. All possible natural processes need to be considered and eliminated (potshard example).
    Message 10
    
11. (Corollary) We do not believe it could have arisen through natural processes alone.
12. (Corollary) Intermediate stages not possible by natural means.
    Message 11
    
13. Shows all-at-once design skipping all or most trial and error testing.
    Message 13
    
14. Distance of artifact from material source/s vs natural means to move them (Stonehenge example).
15. Multiple pieces of evidence of design (more than one on the list).
    Message 16
    
16. Pattern repetition and variation on a theme (music, seti example).
    Message 26
    
17. (Corollary) Seeing if the design is repeated in other locations (Ed McMahon bust example).
    Message 36
    
18. Artifacts reworked for a second purpose (shark-tooth sword example)
    Message 38
    
19. Specific wear patterns associated with use of artifact for a deduced purpose (microscopic use-wear studies on possible stone liths).
    To this list I would now add:
20. Shows combination of design elements from multiple sources\histories (rear window wiper on all SUV models example).
21. Shows evidence of embellishment unnecessary for the operation of the artifact designed (non-functional artistic patterns).
22. Shows simplicity of design, minimal parts, no extra moving parts (bicycle example)

Feel free to add more examples\methods. There's also some duplication or overlap, so if anyone wants to make a condensed list, go for it.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : condense

---