Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ARCHIVE: Signals from space aliens or random chance?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Knight View Post
    Johnny, you just don't get it do you?

    If it's theoretically possible to get the desired roll of the dice on the first try then its theoretically possibly we could get the signal from space in our life times.

    Unless you can up with a logical reason that would preclude such an event (I am all ears!). If not, you are simply obfuscating.
    With all due respect, I do 'get it'.

    I don't deny that it's just as (un)likely that the signal is randomly generated tomorrow as it was that the signal is randomly generated 5000 years ago. It is theoretically possible that it could be randomly generated in our life time and it is no more probable than it was 1000 years ago or will be 1000 years from now.

    What I'm arguing is that it is a valid statement to say that the likelihood of such a random signal appearing at some point in time increases with the age of the universe. This is not the same thing as saying that it is more likely to be generated tomorrow than it was 3 million years ago. Surely you agree that the more lottery cards you buy during any single lottery, the more likely you are to win that lottery. Right? In the same way, the more time that elapses in the universe, the more random signal "lottery" is played. That's all that's being argued.
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

    Comment


    • May as well throw myself to the wolves here. I hope I have the time and energy to follow it up.

      I think that creationists don't like to argue with devout Christians who believe in evolution. You need the atheists so you can throw abiogenesis at them in one post and then evolution in another and some strange theories about carbon dating in another. And the probability argument, is always bunk.

      FedUp mentioned apples and oranges.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Knight View Post
        Johnny, you just don't get it do you?

        If it's theoretically possible to get the desired roll of the dice on the first try then its theoretically possibly we could get the signal from space in our life times.

        Unless you can up with a logical reason that would preclude such an event (I am all ears!). If not, you are simply obfuscating.
        You're the obfuscating party and you're talking out your hat and know little to nothing about event (a priori and a posteriori), conjoint, and contingent probability.

        Johnny isn't saying it isn't theoretically impossible to get the signal now, yesterday, or tomorrow. We know it is. It's just astronomically unlikely to occur anytime from the creation to trillions of years from now. If we got the message tomorrow you'd be a fool to default to believe it being a random occurrence. I made the case very clearly in my earlier post and you can't refute it - only twist words.

        There is nothing magic about this. The same statistics apply to our world everyday in accepting or rejecting disease treatments and most scientific hypotheses on the basis of statistical significance. It makes more sense to assume that antibiotics have no curative power and that all those millions seemingly cured by it are coincidents than your assertion that the signal is random which would be orders of magnitude more coincidental. Promise me you'll put your conviction to test if you ever get meningitis.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by SingedWing View Post
          I believe I said few of us not all of us. Nor did I say I was certain of anything. See how easy it easy to let probability games fool you?

          BTW I don't know much but I've heard the numbers on this. If people were banned in order of stupidity from a group of say 100,000 then statistically I would likely be the last man standing. That utter lack of humility is hopefully helpful in your search for a shred of it.
          Do you think people are going to agree with you when you insist you are the smartest one here? You really are stupid.

          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
          E≈mc2
          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
          -Bob B.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by chair
            Now, as has been pointed out here already, evolution isn't a pure probability issue, since the results are sorted after each 'toss of the dice'.
            Originally posted by Knight View Post
            This "sorting" is it done intelligently or randomly?
            Neither. Sorting, filtering, and selection are non-random and unintelligent processes which occur in nature and yield non-random results.
            “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Johnny View Post
              With all due respect, I do 'get it'.

              I don't deny that it's just as (un)likely that the signal is randomly generated tomorrow as it was that the signal is randomly generated 5000 years ago. It is theoretically possible that it could be randomly generated in our life time and it is no more probable than it was 1000 years ago or will be 1000 years from now.

              What I'm arguing is that it is a valid statement to say that the likelihood of such a random signal appearing at some point in time increases with the age of the universe. This is not the same thing as saying that it is more likely to be generated tomorrow than it was 3 million years ago. Surely you agree that the more lottery cards you buy during any single lottery, the more likely you are to win that lottery. Right? In the same way, the more time that elapses in the universe, the more random signal "lottery" is played. That's all that's being argued.
              But none of that would help you make your determination while visiting your friend at SETI.

              In other words...
              When the signal was received the length of time SETI had been tracking signals would play no part in the determination if the signal was generated randomly or by intelligent means.
              Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
              TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                Do you think people are going to agree with you when you insist you are the smartest one here? You really are stupid.

                Well it was just a stupid human test and happened long ago. I'm senile now so don't let it get to you. Are you listed as a Christian?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Johnny View Post
                  With all due respect, I do 'get it'.

                  I don't deny that it's just as (un)likely that the signal is randomly generated tomorrow as it was that the signal is randomly generated 5000 years ago. It is theoretically possible that it could be randomly generated in our life time and it is no more probable than it was 1000 years ago or will be 1000 years from now.

                  What I'm arguing is that it is a valid statement to say that the likelihood of such a random signal appearing at some point in time increases with the age of the universe. This is not the same thing as saying that it is more likely to be generated tomorrow than it was 3 million years ago. Surely you agree that the more lottery cards you buy during any single lottery, the more likely you are to win that lottery. Right? In the same way, the more time that elapses in the universe, the more random signal "lottery" is played. That's all that's being argued.
                  Actually, your chances of winning the lottery are 100% if you buy the right numbers and 0% if you buy the wrong numbers. Buying 500 billion sets of numbers does not increase your chances if none of them have the winning numbers.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by SingedWing View Post
                    Well it was just a stupid human test and happened long ago. I'm senile now so don't let it get to you. Are you listed as a Christian?
                    No. I'm a meat popsicle.
                    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                    E≈mc2
                    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                    -Bob B.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ThePhy View Post
                      I am proposing a simplification of your MM scenario as a starting point. Your requirement is that every pixel on the TV have the hue and intensity of the desired picture. A too-dark pixel on her nose would look like a zit – not permitted. Not even one fly speck on the backdrop behind her, or chipped piece of fingernail polish permitted. Your are a harder taskmaster than Leona Helmsly.

                      I am suggesting that the simplified test be that we start with the same picture, but only require that the pixel in the top left corner be perfect. Kind of a “one pixel” picture. That pixel can be varied over a range of hues and intensities, but only the exact hue and intensity of that pixel in the original pic will be accepted.

                      Is this logically different from your MM scenario in any way other than the number of pixels involved?
                      Well, it isn't "my" scenario it was my professor's scenario which all of you seemed to think was completely reasonable (on the other thread).

                      Furthermore, I did come up with a more "easy" scenario.... I came up with the very simple message from space that would be dramatically less improbable than generating a picture of Marilyn Monroe juggling fish via random pixels.

                      And so far its a clean sweep, every single one of you has admitted you would be comfortable admitting that the signal was generated intelligently and not randomly.

                      Apparently for you folks the more complex something is the more likely it was generated randomly, and the less complex a pattern is the more likely it was generated by intelligent life. Go figure!
                      Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
                      TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Knight
                        Apparently for you folks the more complex something is the more likely it was generated randomly, and the less complex a pattern is the more likely it was generated by intelligent life. Go figure!
                        Do you really think it's that simple?
                        “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Johnny View Post
                          Do you really think it's that simple?
                          In comparison to a picture of Marilyn Monroe Juggling Fish being generated via random pixels, or a tennis ball passing effortlessly through a brick wall, or a self replicating living cell..... yes... extremely simple compared to those things.
                          Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
                          TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

                          Comment


                          • Depends on the understanding of the person hearing the sounds. The bible I read makes it very clear that "Man" is made in the image of God. Meaning we have a mind, emotion, and will, a soul, and spirit? Something that other created beings do not possess. There is never any mention of anything, or anyone living on another planet. In fact man is God's only creation, created in his image. Consider: if God created any other beings, why did he not choose to save them? Angels are not saved. Makes no sense to me..

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by scparmy View Post
                              Depends on the understanding of the person hearing the sounds. The bible I read makes it very clear that "Man" is made in the image of God. Meaning we have a mind, emotion, and will, a soul, and spirit? Something that other created beings do not possess. There is never any mention of anything, or anyone living on another planet. In fact man is God's only creation, created in his image. Consider: if God created any other beings, why did he not choose to save them? Angels are not saved. Makes no sense to me..
                              I am not making the case for aliens. Instead I am testing the intellectual honesty of folks who often claim that extremely complex things are the products of random chance. Yet as we have seen in this thread each and every one of them would attribute intelligence to the somewhat simple signal from space.
                              Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
                              TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Door View Post
                                Actually, your chances of winning the lottery are 100% if you buy the right numbers and 0% if you buy the wrong numbers. Buying 500 billion sets of numbers does not increase your chances if none of them have the winning numbers.


                                I gotta tip my hat to you That's the stupidest and funniest thing I've heard all day. I can't wait to show the folks at Dawkins.

                                FYI: there is no such thing as chance if you have a priori outcome information as implicit in your statement.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X