General Discussion

its infancy. That's utterly ludicrous. You think I'm applying some entirely different standard to whatever civilization we might be speaking of when it's you that is ignoring science entirely when you ignore its limitations. And your statement "broadband signals still show up as nonrandom data when looking even at only one frequency" Uhh, sure chief. And where is the slightest bit of proof for that statement? Pulling stuff out of your ass is not a substitute for logical debate. Try looking at hash information for encrypted data and tell me that that looks "nonrandom" to you. Try looking at a single channel of a multiplexed signal and you tell me that looks "nonrandom". You don't know very much about data transmission, you actually know next to nothing about it. That's fine, but you shouldn't pretend that you do. This is what I've done my entire adult life. You trying to get an education on the fly is no way to make an argument.