10 thoughts on “Start your design detection engines please.”

  2. I’m busy so just a quick note.

    At this distance you would not be able to reject the null hypothesis with my “string” method. There is just no way to measure the image at a fine enough resolution to get a string with more than a few hundred discrete points. There is no good way to evaluate this one without better data.

    Even if my method proves to be generally reliable we would want to get a closer view in situations like this one.

    peace

  6. Can I have my DI fellowship now?

    Yes, but no stipend until you appear on ID the Future with Casey Luskin. You sure you want to go through with this?

  7. fifthmonarchyman: Even if my method proves to be generally reliable we would want to get a closer view in situations like this one.

    The SETI approach! Excellent. Find your anomaly. Then get more information. I’d also wonder whether human experience can tell us something. Assuming it is not a photographic artefact, (Mike Gene and the face on Mars – no, better not to ask) what do we have on Earth that might be a candidate. Could it be a giant crystal?

  9. easy enough.

    only two-sides are showing. of the two side that are showing, they are not identical. So we can conclude that the object in question at best is the tail of a huge crystalline (natural) structure.

    In order for the object to be detected as a designed object, we would have to examine the structure as a whole, meaning excavating the rock, count the sides and measure each of them.

    For the rock to qualify as designed, each side would have to have identical measurements if its a four-sided object (including the bottom).

  10. Steve: For the rock to qualify as designed, each side would have to have identical measurements if its a four-sided object (including the bottom).

    Is it your position then that all cubes are designed then?

Leave a Reply