It's possible that there is a chance....

[TimH]

...that SETI returned something of interest (as opposed to the normal static)

Naturally folks are hedging there bets but it's still kinda cool. They are saying the find was through SETI@home! =D>

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/09/02/space.signals.reut/index.html

I know it's way too early, but if it turns out that SETI did find an ET signal, can I put "Facilitated the discovery of extraterrestrial life" on my resume? I must have processed a few thousand of those packets by now :wink:

[Captain Kidd]

Check out this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16084). They're already saying it got blown out of proportion (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3621608.stm) (the media would never do that! ;) ).

[Toutatis]

---Security Header (OutDat)---
Systems: $37C-$26-$36
DAY: 21152.90537037037 (TSA)
09/02/2004 17:08:44 (Gregorian/UTC)
~~~

I suspect it's an 'artifact' of the receiver... Here we have the Hertzian equivalent to 'lens flare' ;-)

TTFN
Dan Sarandon
PS don't even ask what happened to 'Plan to be surprised' --- that be the 'other one' :D

[EFossa]

Check out this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16084). They're already saying it got blown out of proportion (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3621608.stm) (the media would never do that! ;) ).

The media didn't. I first saw the story in the normally reputable New Scientist. If its all hype where did this news story come from in the first place?

[Grand Vizier]

Check out this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16084). They're already saying it got blown out of proportion (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3621608.stm) (the media would never do that! ;) ).

The media didn't. I first saw the story in the normally reputable New Scientist. If its all hype where did this news story come from in the first place?

Check the BBC's take, with quotes from the astronomers involved.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3621608.stm

It's a real story in its way, but my best guess is that a New Scientist correspondent dressed it up a little and then that the bank holiday panic led to late news being a little less well checked than it could have been. August Bank Holiday in the UK takes two days out of the schedule, which is serious for the publication of a weekly. Been there, done that. Total nightmare.

None of which explains why the editor was so enraptured of the story he did a front page piece on it...

[Diamond]

Check out this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16084). They're already saying it got blown out of proportion (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3621608.stm) (the media would never do that! ;) ).

The media didn't. I first saw the story in the normally reputable New Scientist. If its all hype where did this news story come from in the first place?

The New Scientist has been hyping bad science for years. This one is no exception.

Folks, if there really was a good signal, why is the place its supposed to come from, empty? Why does it's frequency shift reset itself every time you look at it again?

[Plat]

i hope so