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.

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.

Do we have a winner here?

Sequence 1:
attatcacaaaatggtgtgatcttatcaatagcactacttgcttaactagctaatgtcgt
gcaattggagtagagaacacagaacgattaactagctaatttttttagttggatggcaat
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
gattaccgtgactgagttaactagctaaaagaaaacgaagctaaaagtgatgcgccccta
agtacaggagggggtgcttcttctggaacatttaataaatacctcaacaccaagcaagcg
ttagagagcatcggcatcttgtttgatggggatggaatgaggaatgtggttacccaactc
0: SSGWNSVNXLSRKHRTNXFYDYRDXVNXLKENEAKSDAPL
STGGGASSGTFNKYLNTKQALESIGILFDGDGMRNVVTQL
1: VVGGIVLTSXVENTERINSTITVTELTSXKKTKLKVMRPX
VQEGVLLLEHLINTSTPSKRXRASASCLMGMEXGMWLPN
2: XWVEXCXLAKXKTPNELILRLPXLSXLAKRKRSXKXCAPK
YRRGCFFWNIXXIPQHQASVREHRHLVXWGWNEECGYPT

Sequence 5:
ttttatttgtttaatagttaaaaaaagcgttaactagctaatgcataaacgacatcgcta
atgactgtctttatgatgaattaactagctaatgggtcgatgtttgatgttatggagcag
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

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

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.

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.)