Author Topic: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars  (Read 3003 times)

Offline Colanth

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #15 on: September 03, 2013, 03:34:25 PM »
Quote from: "gomtuu77"
Quote from: "Colanth"
There's objective evidence that material objectively exists.  Gods?  None yet.  At all.  Ever.
None that you're familiar with or that you accept, which is quite different than "None yet. At all. Ever."
Instead of making meaningless assertions, just post whatever objective evidence you have.  Assuming you have anything that's actually objective and actually evicentiary.

Quote
Quote from: "Colanth"
Difficulty, not impossibility.
You are correct.  It's obviously not impossible, as we are here.  But doing so through a purely undirected purposeless material process likely moves that task outside the bounds of "difficult" and into the realm of the "impossible".
Maybe that would have been a rational sentence a few years ago, but since we know know of at least one method by which life could have originated from non-life, it no longer is.

Quote
Quote from: "Colanth"
Given billions of chemical reactions per second, and 500 million years, the only rational question is, "why did it take so long?"
Because of the probabilities involved in the very first step
But, as I said, we already know one such first step, and it's pretty trivial, so the question of why it took so long still remains.

Quote
not counting the nearly countless steps to get you the rest of the way to an actual lifeform
One step.  Please stop relying on 5 year old science.  The field is moving much too fast for that to be anything but comical.

Quote
with information bearing structures and processes for continued existance through time.
As I said, 5 year old science.  Which, considering what's been learned in the past 5 years, may as well be 5,000 year old science.

Quote
Quote from: "Colanth"
They weren't at first. There wasn't any DNA at first either.
I know...making the idea itself that much more implausible.
Only if you don't actually understand the idea.  RNA-based life existed for a LONG time before DNA came on the scene.  And non-RNA-based life existed for a long time before RNA came about.  Unless, by "life", you mean little beasties swimming around with fins and tails.  There were clumps of chemicals that took in nourishment, excreted waste and reproduced.  That's life.

Quote
I have no doubt that we'll be able to re-create some kind of novel never before extant life in the lab, but I know it will never be done by way of a purely naturalistic process.
Aside from the fact that something man-made is purely "naturalistic" (man exists within nature), not if we want to see the results while our great-grandchildren are still alive.  Remember, the original abiogenesis took half a BILLION years.  If you want to wait around that long, I'm sure someone could set up a "premordial soup" for you and you could see life coming from non-life.  But as far as science (and reality) is concerned, doing the same thing manually doesn't invalidate the fact that any life we get from non-living material, by setting up the same conditions that originally existed, proves beyond doubt that life COULD HAVE come about naturalistically without any outside agency.

If you choose to deny reality, that's your choice.

Quote
Quote from: "Colanth"
But please, post all the actual evidence you have of any god ever existing.  We'll buy more database space for the forum if necessary.  (But be warned, the smallest amount of space you can use is one byte [I'm not writing bit-manipulation software for the forum], and I don't think you'll ever find even that much evidence, so although there's no practical upper limit to the amount of evidence you can post, there's an actual lower limit.)
There's quite a 'bit' of information to consider actually, and if I thought I was dealing with someone who was genuinely interested, I might actually post information.
You're dealing with about 5 billion people (every non-Christian human being on the planet) who'd love to see actual objective evidence that the Christian god objectively exists.

Quote
Just out of curiosity though, where do you think information originated?  I'm not making any argument, but I am interested in your point of view.
I don't have the vaguest idea.  The fact that I don't know everything isn't evidence of any god, though.  If that's the kind of "evidence" you're thinking of, it's not evidence of any god and it's certainly not objective evidence that any god objectively exists.  (You DO know what "objective evidence" and "objectively exists" mean, right?)
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Offline SGOS

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2013, 03:37:10 PM »
Quote from: "Plu"
How big do you think the universe is?
ooh, I dunno.  Maybe 18,000 miles?  Sometimes I look at the night sky and feel like I could reach up and touch the stars... with my heart.  So it can't be too big. :-D

Offline Plu

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2013, 03:40:39 PM »
Quote from: "SGOS"
Quote from: "Plu"
How big do you think the universe is?
ooh, I dunno.  Maybe 18,000 miles?  Sometimes I look at the night sky and feel like I could reach up and touch the stars... with my heart.  So it can't be too big. :-D

It's an interesting question to ask of anyone who throws around the word 'unlikely' when it comes to things like interaction of natural materials. Most people get it wrong by many orders of magnitude.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #18 on: September 03, 2013, 04:26:46 PM »
I really do wish we could figure out the answer in my lifetime.  I wonder what life would have been like for the  earliest "humans".  Or what they looked like.
If you don't chew big red then FUCK YOU!

Offline Colanth

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #19 on: September 03, 2013, 04:35:12 PM »
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"
I wonder what life would have been like for the  earliest "humans".  Or what they looked like.
That depends on what you mean by "earliest humans".  Homo sapiens?  Homo?  Hominids?  Anthropoids?  Primates?

We have pretty good ideas going back about 3 million years, and some ideas, not so accurate, going back about 6 million.  If you're limiting it to Homo sapiens sapiens, they all looked pretty much like us.  You wouldn't take notice of someone who lived 50,000 years ago, if you brought him/her up to now, cleaned him/her up and put him/her into modern clothes.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Offline SGOS

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #20 on: September 03, 2013, 05:20:48 PM »
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"
I really do wish we could figure out the answer in my lifetime.  I wonder what life would have been like for the  earliest "humans".  Or what they looked like.
At one time, I would have said man has been around for 5 million years, but as pointed out, that would include the early hominids.  50,000 is what I hear, too, Maybe 100,000 on the high end.  

I read someplace that most animals with such a short lived success like man, probably haven't even made it to the fossil record, so we don't even know about them.  There were probably some evolutionary wonders that we could never imagine.

And as far as man's success and longevity, we don't have much of a track record to point to.  Homo Ergaster of 1.8 million years ago, inhabited Africa for 500,000 years (10 times longer than us), and were in such numbers that they actually made it into the fossil record, but then just disappeared.  Not sure if Ergaster was even an ancestor of ours or just a branch on the hominoid limb.  If we met one, he would probably just eat us anyway, so he's probably not what I would consider "us".

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #21 on: September 03, 2013, 05:23:35 PM »
Quote from: "gomtuu77"
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"
Quote from: "gomtuu77"
And they already know about the fantastically long odds
of 1. It happened, therefore the odds of it happening are 1. Where the necessary conditions took place is irrelevant to the fact that they did take place for the purposes of your argument.

I don't really know why some folks here bother wasting paragraphs on you when your own ignorance speaks for itself.
Okay, so the odds are 1 in what?  And are you speaking of our existance or all of the individual steps it would have taken to get here?

The odds of something which has already occurred occurring are always 1 in 1.
Atheists are not anti-Christian. They are anti-stupid.--WitchSabrina

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #22 on: September 03, 2013, 05:29:53 PM »
Quote from: "gomtuu77"
This strikes me as yet more grasping at straws to try to find a way for life to have begun in a circumstance shackled by naturalism/materialism.  Given the difficulty of bringing useful proteins into existence naturalistically, assuming amino acids are readily present for such a circumstance to plausibly begin in the first place, the addition of molybdenum doesn't seem to actually move anything forward.  It always make me laugh though when I get a chance to observe the naturalist/materialist community closing their eyes, crossing their fingers, and chanting..."I think it can, I think it can, I think it can...!"

I'm all for continuing the research, but they are going to end up at the same dead end of being unable to produce an appropriate number of "useful proteins" and the ultimate production of information-bearing structures like DNA.

It strikes me as sensationalism. It has not been established that oxidized molybdenum is actually necessary for the initial formation of life.
Atheists are not anti-Christian. They are anti-stupid.--WitchSabrina

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #23 on: September 03, 2013, 06:05:06 PM »
Quote from: "gomtuu77"
I know...making the idea itself that much more implausible.  I have no doubt that we'll be able to re-create some kind of novel never before extant life in the lab, but I know it will never be done by way of a purely naturalistic process.


Could you explain what is a non-naturalistic process and how it relates with abiogenesis?

Also what do you mean by naturalistic?

Offline PopeyesPappy

Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #24 on: September 03, 2013, 08:43:30 PM »
Quote from: "mauricio"
what do you mean by naturalistic?
For most of us that would be not involving god. For gomtuu77 I'm assuming it means not involving scientists (otherwise know as demons.)
Save a life. Adopt a Greyhound.


Re: Life on Earth May Have Begun on Mars
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2013, 01:04:09 AM »
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"
Quote from: "mauricio"
what do you mean by naturalistic?
For most of us that would be not involving god. For gomtuu77 I'm assuming it means not involving scientists (otherwise know as demons.)

Well I'm always confused when someone talks about something non natural , antinatural or non material, cause as far as i know those words are by the definition of the word they negate: meaningless.

So i think he might have different definitions...

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk