More Evidence for the Slartibartfarst Principle

Earlier I wrote that due to the Slartibartfarst principle,

…the evidence for intelligent design ought to be readily available in the graffiti of DNA. "Slartibartfast was here," or perhaps "3.14159265," or given what we know of economics, "All rights reserved, MegaCorp. Call for a free estimate."

The fact that, as of yet, we don't see this kind of signature in the data is evidence against intelligent design.

With yesterday's announcement we have a bit more evidence favoring the premise of my argument.  

To distinguish their synthetic genome from the naturally occurring version, the researchers encoded a series of watermarks into the sequence. They began by developing a code for writing the English alphabet, as well as punctuation and numbers, into the language of DNA–a decoding key is included in the sequence itself. Then they wrote in their names, a few quotations, and the address for a website people can visit if they successfully crack the code.

Life as advertisement, this is the wave of the future!

Comments

Comments for this post are closed