Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
What's sad about SETI?

Nothing per se. I'm just pointing out that searching for intelligent* patterns in what are usually considered random elements is not the exclusive preserve of ignorant, religious country bumpkins.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Nothing per se. I'm just pointing out that searching for intelligible patterns in what are usually considered random elements is not the exclusive preserve of ignorant, religious country bumpkins.

The difference being that Seti won't start saying they're there until they have justifiably certain evidence to show it.

Originally posted by Starrman
The difference being that Seti won't start saying they're there until they have justifiably certain evidence to show it.

But they didn't need any "justifiably certain evidence" to begin searching and throw millions of dollars into the effort.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
But they didn't need any "justifiably certain evidence" to begin searching and throw millions of dollars into the effort.

So what? So now scientific research should be curbed until it is certain that it will be fruitful?

Originally posted by Starrman
So what? So now scientific research should be curbed until it is certain that it will be fruitful?

No - but that's besides the point.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
No - but that's besides the point.

How is it beside the point? You seem to be suggesting Seti is on the same level of redneck bible-belters.

Originally posted by Starrman
How is it beside the point? You seem to be suggesting Seti is on the same level of redneck bible-belters.

It isn't the finding of evidence that Nemesio is alluding to as "sad", but the searching. In that respect, yes, I do think SETI and religious people are comparable.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
But they didn't need any "justifiably certain evidence" to begin searching and throw millions of dollars into the effort.

Science has shown that it is quite possible for intelligent life to exist on other planets. It is part of the study of science to try to determine whether that is or is not the case. If you can suggest a way to try and determine whether God exists or not I am sure that people would also throw millions of dollars into it. With the case in point I believe that many scientific studies have been done in the past on the validity of phenomena such as the fish in the article and to date no evidence for the supernatural has been found. However there is a vast difference between scientists spending money searching for information and religious fanatics drawing wild conclusions from precious little evidence.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
It isn't the finding of evidence that Nemesio is alluding to as "sad", but the searching. In that respect, yes, I do think SETI and religious people are comparable.

There's a massive difference between looking for the name of god on a fish and searching for life on other planets.

Originally posted by twhitehead
fanatics drawing wild conclusions from precious little evidence.

Science has shown that it is quite possible for intelligent life to exist on other planets.
Slight correction. As Darwinianists and their ilk have run out of plausible origins herein, they have been speculating that something outside the system must have contributed the necessary life stuff. Eerily like a "Goddunnit" scenario, only statistically less likely.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
It isn't the finding of evidence that Nemesio is alluding to as "sad", but the searching. In that respect, yes, I do think SETI and religious people are comparable.

The premise of SETI's seraching is sound. There is good reason to believe that if intelligent life exists elsewhere, radio waves are a likely medium of communication that they would use.

The premise of the Muslims' searching is not sound. There is no good reason to believe that if Allah exists, he would communicate by having his name appear on a fish. If there were, surely at least one of the Muslim billionnaires would have establised an SGFI.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
The premise of the Muslims' searching is not sound. There is no good reason to believe that if Allah exists, he would communicate by having his name appear on a fish.

On the contrary, if Allah exists, he would be the Creator of the fish. As such, there is no reason to think He won't communicate by writing his name on a fish. If His name were to be observed on a fish (which implies that the observer could recognise "Allah" when he finds it, even if he isn't looking for it on a fish) there is no good reason to think it isn't a communication from Him when the observer believes in Allah.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
As such, there is no reason to think He won't communicate by writing his name on a fish. If His name were to be observed on a fish (which implies that the observer could recognise "Allah" when he finds it, even if he isn't looking for it on a fish) there is no good reason to think it isn't a communication from Him when the observer believes in Allah.

No wonder vistesd left.

You don't really believe what you just wrote, do you? How can you even get through life if that actually represents your epistemology?

There are plenty of good reasons to think that Allah wouldn't use that means of communication - the most obvious of which is that he would know that only fanatics would acknowledge it, in which case all it would be doing is confirming what they already know, so he really wouldn't be communicating anything at all.

There are plenty of good reasons to think that it isn't a communication from Allah, regardless of the observer's faith.

Originally posted by Nemesio
If a member of SETI interpreted random signals as 'communication' then, yes,
it would be just as sad.

OMG! Two bleeps followed by a blip! An alien just said 'Good Morning!'

I believe that God communicated just as much information to people through
this fish as aliens have communicated to us. Those who believe that aliens
have communicate ...[text shortened]... ust as pathetic as those
who think God spoke to them through the side of a fish.

Nemesio

echo of the big bang

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
No wonder vistesd left.

You don't really believe what you just wrote, do you? How can you even get through life if that actually represents your epistemology?

There are plenty of good reasons to think that Allah wouldn't use that means of communication - the most obvious of which is that he would know that only fanatics would acknowledge it, ...[text shortened]... sons to think that it isn't a communication from Allah, regardless of the observer's faith.

No wonder vistesd left.

He's off mulling about maps and territories whilst lost in the countryside, I wager. 😉

You don't really believe what you just wrote, do you? How can you even get through life if that actually represents your epistemology?

Exactly how is "my" epistemology different from a SETI scientist's?

in which case all it would be doing is confirming what they already know

I'm surprised you didn't use the word "believe" above.

And, actually, I think it would be more than "fanatics" who'd acknowledge it. There might be "sitting on the fence" Muslims who might be swayed by such an event.