Joined: June 2006
|What are they looking for in the data? An INFERENCE of intelligence, which would lead them to conclude an intelligence responsible for sending the obviously 'designed' message .|
So an INFERENCE of intelligence would lead them to infer intelligence. Can't argue with that. Whenever I infer X, my very next step is always to infer X. Of course, that puts me in an endless loop of inference until I hit Ctrl-C.
|then why is an inference of intelligence in complex living systems here on earth not proof of an intelligent designer of that complex system?|
Who said it isn't? If you legitimately infer intelligent design in complex living systems, then by golly, those systems were intelligently designed. As an added bonus, you'll be famous.
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot