Do evolutionists find any irony in the SETI Program?

Question

Here you have a program that looks for any type of electromagnetic pattern as a possible indication of intelligent life
While the same scientists (mostly evolutionists) can look at the highly structured human body and ignore all the signs of intelligent design.

So to these people, even a trace of order is sufficient to indicate ET life, but incredibly complex design only shows random mutation.

Whazuup with that?

Answer 1

I agree, it does seem inconsistent. I think people tend to be very irrational when confronted with information that tends to contradict their entrenched, highly ideological conception of reality.

Answer 2

Well you have a number of inaccuracies/ misconceptions that you're using as assumptions in your thought process.

First off SETI scientists are not the same scientists that do research into evolutionary biology. Second, the assumption that looking at the human body (or any other facet of the complex world we live in) is an indication (or proof) of an intelligent designer does not logically follow.

You are using an assumption to prove the same assumption as a conclusion - this is a logical fallacy.

If you want to find the truth you must start with a mind open to all possibilities - even those you might find distasteful.

The SETI program you described correctly. There is no conflict whatsoever between searching for EM radiation patterns as indicators of extraterrestrial life and evolutionary biology.

Answer 3

Not at all. It's a search. So far, nothing has shown up, perhaps it never will. A trace of repeating signals MAY indicate life, and MAY point a direction for a closer look, that's all.

It's rather like saying you shouldn't enter a store if you're just browsing.

Gods on the other hand, are supernatural, so there's not point in looking for them.

What's the problem?

Answer 4

Why is all the Creationist BS in the science section? Why don't you take it over to the religion area where you could discuss it forever and no one would be annoyed. "Creationism", "Intelligent Design" and all the related subgenres are not science. Evolution is what science guys have come up with after hundreds of years of study. Unless you have some compelling evidence to show that your alternative ideas are a more complete and correct explanation of the evidence that's accumulated, please give it a rest!

Answer 5

Not at all. There is no reason why life could not have 'evolved' on other planets, if conditions were favourable . Indeed life on earth may have come from another world , seeded by bacteria from a comet . I think the average evolutionist would jump for joy if life was found on another world. It would give the creationists one heck of a red face.

Answer 6

I think you are confusing the "intelligent life" with "intelligent design". Existence of intelligent life does not mean that there was an intelligent creator behind it (its an unintelligent approach).

We've evolved from relatively less intelligent and less conscious primitive organisms. If you jump directly from an amoeba to humans you'll get flabbergasted. Take a step by step approach and you'll come to love evolution.

Answer 7

what's and "evolutionist", and what does evolution could do with the great Bang concept? they are no longer linked, settle for that they are the two scientific theories. as far because of the fact the scientific community's reluctance to settle for the great Bang concept, it became because of the fact it flew interior the face of what the present concept became. Which became that the universe became static and not increasing. no longer something to do with the term "beginning up" being too theistic! It took extra examine and documents to coach the static universe concept fake, and giving the great Bang concept extra steam. So i do no longer see any irony there.

Answer 8

Bodies are complex but show "natural design" - structure explainable through known natural processes. I won't bother debating all of evolution right here, but I'll simply state that SETI is looking for "artificial design".

There is plenty of "structure" and "pattern" in SETI signals already - naturally occurring structure and pattern. What they are looking for are signals *not* explainable through known natural processes. A signal that encoded a long series of prime numbers, for example.

Answer 9

Evolution does not say random mutation. Read Darwin's theory before discussing it.

Answer 10

You are weard and you ask weard questions. Leave your computer every once in awhile and try to get in touch with life.