Home » Intelligent Design » Ian Musgrave’s “Intelligent Design Challenge”

Ian Musgrave’s “Intelligent Design Challenge”

January 31, 2008 Posted by William Dembski under Intelligent Design
41 Comments

I received the following email dated 1.31.08 from Ian Musgrave:

Dear Dr. Dembski

Determining where a genome has been produced or altered by an intelligent designer is a matter of some importance. Consider the
claims that the HIV virus was engineered as a biowarfare weapon, or the concern that virulence genes from other organisms could be inserted into viruses and bacteria to “weaponise” them. For example the engineered mouse pox virus that turned lethal (Nature. 2001 May 17;411(6835):232-5 see also Nat Genet. 2001 Nov;29(3):253-6) and limits on the sequencing of the 1918 strain of the flu to stop flu from being weaponised (Fed Regist. 2005 Oct 20;70(202):61047-9,). A method that could reliably detect the action of human intelligent design in the genomes of microorganisms would be of significant advantage.

Thus we issue the “Intelligent Design Challenge”. Below are 6 gene sequences. At least one of them has been produced by a human designer. All you have to do is to determine which one(s) have been acted on, what the designed sequence does, and explain the method you used to determine this (in sufficient detail to replicate your determination eg. if you used an approximation of Chaitin information, a brief description of the algorithm you used [not the entire program]). Given your interest in design, you may wish to participate. You migght also like to pass this on to your colleagues.

The first successful determination of the designed sequence(s) and their function will win a copy of OpenLab 2007, the best of Science Blogging. You may wish to Reminding everyone again, the comments will be opened at 10:30 pm Australian Central Daylight Savinng Time (GMT +10:30), 1 February.

Sequence 1:
attatcacaa aatggtgtga tcttatcaat
agcactactt gcttaactag ctaatgtcgt
gcaattggag tagagaacac agaacgatta
actagctaat ttttttagtt ggatggcaat
tgttggaatt cacagctttt tagttggaat
tttagttaat catcaaacac ttaaaataag
taaaaagtat gttattttag gttcgatttt
tccaattatg gcattaacaa atactcttgt

Sequence 2:
gatagtagtg ggtggaatag tgaagaaaac
gaagctaaaa gtgatgcgcc cctaagtaca
ggagggggtg cttcttctgg aacatttaat
aaatacctca acaccaagca agcgttagag
agcatcggca tcttgtttga tggggatgga
atgaggaatg tggttaccca actctattat
gcttctacca gcaagctagc agtcaccaac
aaccacattg tcgtgatggg taacagcttt

Sequence 3:
attatcacaa aatggtgtga tcttatcaat
agcactactt gcttttttta gttggatggc
aattgttgga attcacagct ttttagttgg
aattttagtt aatcatcaaa cacttaaaat
aagtaaaaag tatgttattt taggttcgat
ttttccaatt atggcattaa caaatactct
tgtaattaga aaaaaattaa aagctttatt
aggagagggt aaggttcaaa aaggactcaa

Sequence 4:
agtagtgggt ggaatagtgt taactagcta
agtagaaaac accgaacgaa ttaattctac
gattaccgtg actgagttaa ctagctaaaa
gaaaacgaag ctaaaagtga tgcgccccta
agtacaggag ggggtgcttc ttctggaaca
tttaataaat acctcaacac caagcaagcg
ttagagagca tcggcatctt gtttgatggg
gatggaatga ggaatgtggt tacccaactc

Sequence 5:
ttttatttgt ttaatagtta aaaaaagcgt
taactagcta atgcataaac gacatcgcta
atgactgtct ttatgatgaa ttaactagct
aatgggtcga tgtttgatgt tatggagcag
caacgatgtt acgcagcagg gcagtcgccc
taaaacaaag ttaaacatca tgttatgttt
tatctatttt attagttaaa aaagttttga
atttttatct atttttagtt aataaaagtc

Sequence 6:
ggagggagat catcagatca aagtaataaa
ttcaccaagt acctcaacac caagcaagca
ttggaaagga tcggcatctt gtttgatggg
gatggaatga ggaatgtggt tacccaactc
taccaaccca acaaggtgaa aagtggtcaa
tatcaacaaa ataacaccta caacaggtta
attgagcctg acaatgcaac aagtgcagcg
agcagcatga ccagcttgtt aaagctgttg

Yours sincerely
Ian Musgrave

========================================
Ian F. Musgrave Ph.D, [email protected]
Senior Lecturer, Discipline of Pharmacology, School of Medical Sciences
Co-convener, Healthy Aging Research Cluster
University of Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

41 Responses to Ian Musgrave’s “Intelligent Design Challenge”

1 2
  1. 31
    AussieIDFebruary 1, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    Ah well, Patrick, it might have to be retitled:

    ‘OpenLabToEveryoneButIdists 2008′

    That may have some issues with typesetting the title though … and that thing about ID. You know, that elephant in the room that no one notices.

    I hope Musgrave autographs a copy of the book for you!

  2. 32
    DLHFebruary 1, 2008 at 7:02 pm

    Joseph 25
    Thanks for the clarification and highlighting the importance of direct analysis. Appreciate your expertise.

    By “clues to content” I was inferring from news of volume of terrorist channel “chatter” related to inferring something major was developing. Similarly, encrypted transmissions between financial facilities. This is not direct inference, but gives some higher probability based on past associations. Similarly the use of anonymizers to reroute emails by rerouting to avoid associative detection.

    Patrick’s reference to finding the sequence in the NIH web site states: “This Genbank entry is for the designed molecule”. That appears a reliable source for the data and evidence of human design, (without relying on the analysis which identified the watermarks.)

  3. 33
    Musgrave Addendum to “Intelligent Design Challenge” | Uncommon DescentFebruary 1, 2008 at 8:13 pm

    [...] Comments DLH: Joseph 25 Thanks for the clarification and highlighting the importance of direct analysis. [...]

  4. 34
    JosephFebruary 2, 2008 at 7:57 am

    DLH,

    My point is that in some biological warfare emergency the scientists would have the whole infecting organism to work with.

    What Patrick did was awesome but just think what could have been accomplished if he had the whole organism to work with.

  5. 35
    DLHFebruary 2, 2008 at 11:49 am

    Joseph 34
    I agree. See my post regarding
    The 1000 Genomes project
    “The 1000 Genomes Project will involve sequencing the genomes of at least a thousand people from around the world.”

    and the
    Archon X Prize for Genomics
    “$10 Million to the First Team to Sequence 100 Human Genomes in 10 Days”

  6. 36
    jFebruary 2, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Just for the record, here are decodings in the three different possible reading frames, with “watermarks” highlighted:

    Sequence 1:
    attatcacaaaatggtgtgatcttatcaatagcactacttgcttaactagctaatgtcgt
    gcaattggagtagagaacacagaacga    ttaactagctaatttttttagttggatggcaat
    tgttggaattcacagctttttagttggaattttagttaatcatcaaacacttaaaataag
    taaaaagtatgttattttaggttcgatttttccaattatggcattaacaaatactcttgt
    0: IITKWCDLINSTTCLTSXCRAIGVENTERLTSXFFXLDGN
    CWNSQLFSWNFSXSSNTXNKXKVCYFRFDFSNYGINKYSC
    1: LSQNGVILSIALLAXLANVVQLEXRTQNDXLANFFSWMAI
    VGIHSFLVGILVNHQTLKISKKYVILGSIFPIMALTNTL
    2: YHKMVXSYQXHYLLNXLMSCNWSREHRTINXLIFLVGWQL
    LEFTAFXLEFXLIIKHLKXVKSMLFXVRFFQLWHXQILL

    Sequence 2:
    gatagtagtgggtggaatagtgaagaaaacgaagctaaaagtgatgcgcccctaagtaca
    ggagggggtgcttcttctggaacatttaataaatacctcaacaccaagcaagcgttagag
    agcatcggcatcttgtttgatggggatggaatgaggaatgtggttacccaactctattat
    gcttctaccagcaagctagcagtcaccaacaaccacattgtcgtgatgggtaacagcttt
    0: DSSGWNSEENEAKSDAPLSTGGGASSGTFNKYLNTKQALE
    SIGILFDGDGMRNVVTQLYYASTSKLAVTNNHIVVMGNSF
    1: IVVGGIVKKTKLKVMRPXVQEGVLLLEHLINTSTPSKRXR
    ASASCLMGMEXGMWLPNSIMLLPASXQSPTTTLSXWVTA
    2: XXWVEXXRKRSXKXCAPKYRRGCFFWNIXXIPQHQASVRE
    HRHLVXWGWNEECGYPTLLCFYQQASSHQQPHCRDGXQL

    Sequence 3:
    attatcacaaaatggtgtgatcttatcaatagcactacttgctttttttagttggatggc
    aattgttggaattcacagctttttagttggaattttagttaatcatcaaacacttaaaat
    aagtaaaaagtatgttattttaggttcgatttttccaattatggcattaacaaatactct
    tgtaattagaaaaaaattaaaagctttattaggagagggtaaggttcaaaaaggactcaa
    0: IITKWCDLINSTTCFFXLDGNCWNSQLFSWNFSXSSNTXN
    KXKVCYFRFDFSNYGINKYSCNXKKIKSFIRRGXGSKRTQ
    1: LSQNGVILSIALLAFFSWMAIVGIHSFLVGILVNHQTLKI
    SKKYVILGSIFPIMALTNTLVIRKKLKALLGEGKVQKGL
    2: YHKMVXSYQXHYLLFLVGWQLLEFTAFXLEFXLIIKHLKX
    VKSMLFXVRFFQLWHXQILLXLEKNXKLYXERVRFKKDS

    Sequence 4:
    agtagtgggtggaatagtgttaactagctaagtagaaaacaccgaacgaattaattctac
    gattaccgtgactgag    ttaactagctaaaagaaaacgaagctaaaagtgatgcgccccta
    agtacaggagggggtgcttcttctggaacatttaataaatacctcaacaccaagcaagcg
    ttagagagcatcggcatcttgtttgatggggatggaatgaggaatgtggttacccaactc
    0: SSGWNSVNXLSRKHRTNXFYDYRDXVNXLKENEAKSDAPL
    STGGGASSGTFNKYLNTKQALESIGILFDGDGMRNVVTQL
    1: VVGGIVLTSXVENTERINSTITVTELTSXKKTKLKVMRPX
    VQEGVLLLEHLINTSTPSKRXRASASCLMGMEXGMWLPN
    2: XWVEXCXLAKXKTPNELILRLPXLSXLAKRKRSXKXCAPK
    YRRGCFFWNIXXIPQHQASVREHRHLVXWGWNEECGYPT

    Sequence 5:
    ttttatttgtttaatagttaaaaaaagcgttaactagctaatgcataaacgacatcgcta
    atgactgtctttatgatgaa    ttaactagctaatgggtcgatgtttgatgttatggagcag
    caacgatgttacgcagcagggcagtcgccctaaaacaaagttaaacatcatgttatgttt
    tatctattttattagttaaaaaagttttgaatttttatctatttttagttaataaaagtc
    0: FYLFNSXKKRXLANAXTTSLMTVFMMNXLANGSMFDVMEQ
    QRCYAAGQSPXNKVKHHVMFYLFYXLKKFXIFIYFXLIKV
    1: FICLIVKKSVNXLMHKRHRXXLSLXXINXLMGRCLMLWSS
    NDVTQQGSRPKTKLNIMLCFIYFISXKSFEFLSIFSXXK
    2: LFVXXLKKALTSXCINDIANDCLYDELTSXWVDVXCYGAA
    TMLRSRAVALKQSXTSCYVLSILLVKKVLNFYLFLVNKS

    Sequence 6:
    ggagggagatcatcagatcaaagtaataaattcaccaagtacctcaacaccaagcaagca
    ttggaaaggatcggcatcttgtttgatggggatggaatgaggaatgtggttacccaactc
    taccaacccaacaaggtgaaaagtggtcaatatcaacaaaataacacctacaacaggtta
    attgagcctgacaatgcaacaagtgcagcgagcagcatgaccagcttgttaaagctgttg
    0: GGRSSDQSNKFTKYLNTKQALERIGILFDGDGMRNVVTQL
    YQPNKVKSGQYQQNNTYNRLIEPDNATSAASSMTSLLKLL
    1: EGDHQIKVINSPSTSTPSKHWKGSASCLMGMEXGMWLPNS
    TNPTRXKVVNINKITPTTGXLSLTMQQVQRAAXPACXSC
    2: REIIRSKXXIHQVPQHQASIGKDRHLVXWGWNEECGYPTL
    PTQQGEKWSISTKXHLQQVNXAXQCNKCSEQHDQLVKAV

    And for ease of reference, here’s the key for decoding the sequences:

    Amino Acid | Letter | Corresponding Codons
    Alanine | A | GCT, GCC, GCA, GCG
    Arginine | R | CGT, CGC, CGA, CGG, AGA, AGG
    Asparagine | N | AAT, AAC
    Aspartic acid | D | GAT, GAC
    Cysteine | C | TGT, TGC
    Glutamic acid | Q | CAA, CAG
    Glutamine | E | GAA, GAG
    Glycine | G | GGT, GGC, GGA, GGG
    Histidine | H | CAT, CAC
    Isoleucine | I | ATT, ATC, ATA
    Leucine | L | TTA, TTG, CTT, CTC, CTA, CTG
    Lysine | K | AAA, AAG
    Methionine | M | ATG
    Phenylalanine | F | TTT, TTC
    Proline | P | CCT, CCC, CCA, CCG
    Serine | S | TCT, TCC, TCA, TCG, AGT, AGC
    Threonine | T | ACT, ACC, ACA, ACG
    Tryptophan | W | TGG
    Tyrosine | Y | TAT, TAC
    Valine | V | GTT, GTC, GTA, GTG
    (Inapplicable) | X | TAG, TGA, TAA

  7. 37
    jpark320February 2, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    WOW J…

    Do we have a winner here?

  8. 38
    langejFebruary 3, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    Where can one find studies that apply specified complexity analysis to real-world phonomena to show the presence or absence of design?

  9. 39
    PatrickFebruary 4, 2008 at 12:51 pm

    j,

    Thanks for posting that complete reference! When I wrote my first hypothetical scenario I assumed that the surrounding characters would not form English words and mostly be gibberish. So your comment bares that assumption out.

    As an interesting study a program could be written to convert entire genomes using Venter’s cypher. Then this information could be searched for any legible English words, taking into account substitutions due to the limited 20 character set. I’d assume that at most we’d find words like “can” and “as” and whatnot. Assuming other groups adopt the Venter cypher for watermarks, this should allow people to find other watermarks and other genomes.

    Also, the other major thing to note is that since Musgrave only challenged us with 3 out of 5 parts of the entire watermark the amount of informational bits would NOT exceed the UPB of 500 informational bits. The 3 portions are only 117 characters, thus 234 informational bits. I find it hard to believe that Musgrave knows so little of ID that he’d contrive a challenge where the only result could be a false negative based upon the limitations of the EF.

    But here is the complete sequence for the entire watermark:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear.....ome101.xml

    TTAACTAGCTAATGTCGTGCAATTGGAGTAGAGAACACAGAACGATTAACTAGCTAA

    TTAACTAGCTAAGTAGAAAACACCGAACGAATTAATTCTACGATTACCGTGACTGAGTTAACTAGCTAA

    TTAACTAGCTAACATGCAATGTCGATGATTACCCACTTAACTAGCTAA

    TTAACTAGCTAATGCATAAACGACATCGCTAATGACTGTCTTTATGATGAATTAACTAGCTAATGGGTCGATGTTTGATGTTATGGAGCAGCAACGATGTTACGCAGCAGGGCAGTCGCCCTAAAACAAAGTTAAACATCATG

    TTAACTAGCTAAGGTCTAGCTAGTAGCGCGAATGACTGCCTATACGATGAG TTAACTAGCTAA

    That’s 380 characters and 760 informational bits, thus the Explanatory Filter would be able to detect the design.

  10. 40
    jFebruary 4, 2008 at 10:38 pm

    Patrick,

    Thanks for recognizing (@8) that the “Challenge” incorporated Venter’s work.

    By the way, it seems that the sequences for the watermarks that you just gave include extra leading and trailing characters. Here are the codings for the actual watermarks themselves, with quantity of characters in brackets:

    TGTCGTGCAATTGGAGTAGAGAACACAGAACGA [33]

    (CRAIGVENTER)

    GTAGAAAACACCGAACGAATTAATTCTACGATTACCGTGACTGAG [45]

    (VENTERINSTITVTE)

    CATGCAATGTCGATGATTACCCAC [24]

    (HAMSMITH)

    TGCATAAACGACATCGCTAATGACTGTCTTTATGATGAA [39]

    (CINDIANDCLYDE)

    GGTCTAGCTAGTAGCGCGAATGACTGCCTATACGATGAG [39]

    (GLASSANDCLYDE)

    So there are only 33 + 45 + 24 + 39 + 39 = 180 characters = 360 bits.

    Also by the way, the code isn’t Venter’s invention. It’s just the common representation of codons in the genetic code.
    __________

    jpark (37),

    Thanks, but I was only confirming what Patrick pointed out at comment (8). I was also curious to see what the non-watermark characters looked like when converted into text, and what resulted from using alternate reading frames.

  11. 41
    PatrickFebruary 5, 2008 at 12:03 am

    heh, that’s what I get for not doublechecking a news media source…never mind being lazy and using such a source in the first place. :D

1 2

Leave a Reply