Who is to say the Earth and humanity are not set up?

[darsenfeld]

There's two problems here.

The first is your sense of scale is off. It took a billion years and all of the world's oceans before life first appeared; no matter how coincidental and unlikely the required events sound, given a large enough timestamp and enough space, just about anything will eventually happen at least once.

The second is that you're reasoning after the fact. The only reason you can ask whether or not humanity was maybe predestined is because we exist. This means that again, no matter how small the odds of us appearing again if we re-seed another planet with life, the only scenario in which someone will wonder how small those odds are is if they came true.

If the dinosaurs hadn't gone exctinct, we wouldn't be here. Simple as that. You are trapped in the notion that humans were "meant to be" and that earth is "a special place for us". These things are not true. The reason there aren't humans on Mars wondering about how hostile the universe is to them, is because they'd be dead. Life must, by definition, exist in a place where it is sustainable, and humans must exist as they are in order to question, so talking about "the odds" is pointless. The odds of something having happened is always 100% after the fact.

Not true by current evidence, not absolute fact.  Whilst there is no God, you don't think it's possible solar systems, planets, etc. could be aligned by outside or conscious forces?  You think our limit for what science can explain is limited?  And after the fact is immaterial, as naturally it takes sapience to even consider this factor.

[aitm]

lulz..  i don't care.  just chuckling at the irony of you all dismissing philosophy when your country wouldn't exist without it..

and cats? Would cats exist without philosophy? Or puppy dogs? Rocks? Would rivers and trees exist without philosophy? And people too? So.....millions of people....millions of scenarios....millions of possibilities cannot exist without philosophy.....yep.... you are now proclaiming that for sure, no other path is possible to any given location other than the one already known?  You are now the established source for all knowledge of all things. Yeah.....sorry bub, you just slipped into tardville.

[darsenfeld]

lolwut?  

never mind, you say philosophy is shit, I disagree.  fine, no issue with me..

[Icarus]

Can you say that the grounds for evolution have NOT been conditioned?  Whilst evolution per se has not been, again who is to say?  I thought science necessitated an open mind?  lol..

Science doesn't necessitate anything besides reproducible experimentation. I've known some very intelligent people who hold doctorates in their respective fields of study but (up until they retired) ran experiments using the same techniques they used for a good chunk of their career.

[aitm]

lolwut?  

never mind, you say philosophy is shit, I disagree.  fine, no issue with me..

no no my good friend. It is YOU who have made that statement that a certain path ( ...philosophy when your country wouldn't exist without it) cannot have been attained without a certain ingredient. This is a certain no-no. You have ascended to god status to proclaim that you know the end all of possibilities.

[Icarus]

lol..  OK, but yeah our current understanding of evolution is absolute fact, never to be questioned or revised unlike all other science right?  

I don't care if it seems "dumb", many aspects lending to our existence and all life on Earth seem too coincidental.  So yeah, the idea that life on Earth could be an experiment of how evolution takes place is dim haha..  wow, Aspergers?

And to the guy who mocks philosophy, yeah...  it took evil philosophy to devise atheism.  evil philosophy to devise science.  and evil philosophy to lead to the modern world, with our cherished liberal democracy, systems of rights, etc. and the foundation of his own country (if he's American).  Jefferson and Franklin and co. based your society on the works of "inept" philosophers...  realise phiosophy is not meant to be a science but a thought experiment.  and damn fucking useful one at that...

No aspect of science is above question, it just so happens that the experiments conducted trying to disprove a common theory tend to fail and not get published. In fact evolution is probably one of the most questioned and revised fields of study in all of science (in part due to the overwhelming number of evolutionary biologists). One of the many problems with Earth being an experiment is the lack of observing the observer. Another is the pointlessness of the experiment. We had 2.6 billion years of single-celled life before anything multi-cellular came around, what kind of observer would wait 2.6 billion years for anything larger than a cell to appear?

The question you posed is basically "Who is to say there is no god?", which is probably why people on this forum don't want to waste time entertaining the question. That horse has been beaten into a fine goo.

[darsenfeld]

lol..  OK, but yeah our current understanding of evolution is absolute fact, never to be questioned or revised unlike all other science right?  

I don't care if it seems "dumb", many aspects lending to our existence and all life on Earth seem too coincidental.  So yeah, the idea that life on Earth could be an experiment of how evolution takes place is dim haha..  wow, Aspergers?

And to the guy who mocks philosophy, yeah...  it took evil philosophy to devise atheism.  evil philosophy to devise science.  and evil philosophy to lead to the modern world, with our cherished liberal democracy, systems of rights, etc. and the foundation of his own country (if he's American).  Jefferson and Franklin and co. based your society on the works of "inept" philosophers...  realise phiosophy is not meant to be a science but a thought experiment.  and damn fucking useful one at that...

No aspect of science is above question, it just so happens that the experiments conducted trying to disprove a common theory tend to fail and not get published. In fact evolution is probably one of the most questioned and revised fields of study in all of science (in part due to the overwhelming number of evolutionary biologists). One of the many problems with Earth being an experiment is the lack of observing the observer. Another is the pointlessness of the experiment. We had 2.6 billion years of single-celled life before anything multi-cellular came around, what kind of observer would wait 2.6 billion years for anything larger than a cell to appear?

The question you posed is basically "Who is to say there is no god?", which is probably why people on this forum don't want to waste time entertaining the question. That horse has been beaten into a fine goo.

er..  OK, so all life must look and be like us, right?  maybe the "observer" is in another dimension, or perhaps Descartes was right? the "evil demon" is in another reality, so the observation to him/her/it/they is not pointless.

Seems like you don't like to speculate things much, or that science may for all we know one day discover alternate dimensions.  And no, God and/or religion to me are stupid, I have no time for them...

[Icarus]

er..  OK, so all life must look and be like us, right?  maybe the "observer" is in another dimension, or perhaps Descartes was right? the "evil demon" is in another reality, so the observation to him/her/it/they is not pointless.

Seems like you don't like to speculate things much, or that science may for all we know one day discover alternate dimensions.  And no, God and/or religion to me are stupid, I have no time for them...

No..... no,no,no and no. First off, when discussing anything you have to have a reason to think the way you do. What thought have you given to these inter-dimensional god creatures that can come and go between dimensions without using or emitting any energy?

Secondly I (sad to say) actually spend a good deal of time when I'm drinking with friends speculating a variety of hypothetical enzymes with different motifs and functions. The difference between doing that and this thread is doing that produces meaningful discussion within the bounds of reality while this thread has the single focus of postulating the supernatural. Unless you're offering a mechanism, this thread is pointless.

[Hydra009]

You're either stunted or not as smart as you project.

Oh, I'm the stupid one for failing to entertain your bullshit.

[Plu]

Whilst there is no God, you don't think it's possible solar systems, planets, etc. could be aligned by outside or conscious forces?  

A more important question is: what difference would it make? If the answer is "nothing", then it's not worth investing time into. If the answer is "something", then you have a starting point for experimentation.

You think our limit for what science can explain is limited?  

Yeah it's limited to things that are "real", with "real" being defined as "has some kind of influence on the universe". If your idea impact the universe at any point, show that point so that it can be measured. If your idea does not, it's both outside of science and completely useless to think about because it cannot affect us.

And after the fact is immaterial, as naturally it takes sapience to even consider this factor.

Yeah, that's exactly why the "but coincidence" argument is bull as an argument against life occuring naturally.

[darsenfeld]

er..  OK, so all life must look and be like us, right?  maybe the "observer" is in another dimension, or perhaps Descartes was right? the "evil demon" is in another reality, so the observation to him/her/it/they is not pointless.

Seems like you don't like to speculate things much, or that science may for all we know one day discover alternate dimensions.  And no, God and/or religion to me are stupid, I have no time for them...

No..... no,no,no and no. First off, when discussing anything you have to have a reason to think the way you do. What thought have you given to these inter-dimensional god creatures that can come and go between dimensions without using or emitting any energy?

Secondly I (sad to say) actually spend a good deal of time when I'm drinking with friends speculating a variety of hypothetical enzymes with different motifs and functions. The difference between doing that and this thread is doing that produces meaningful discussion within the bounds of reality while this thread has the single focus of postulating the supernatural. Unless you're offering a mechanism, this thread is pointless.

Reality is subjective.  They could "move" by means not known or detectable to us at the moment.

[Johan]

You're absolutely right. The very well could be some other being that implanted the seeds of life here and is just using this planet as a giant (to us anyway) petri dish experiment for some 5th grade science fair project in another dimension that we will never be able to observe or comprehend. That is entirely possible. But it is also a theory with absolutely zero verifiable evidence. So even as nothing more than a thought experiment there really isn't much to be gained by pursing something which is so unprovable IMO.

If you want to pursue a question which might yield something meaningful to yourself and others try tackling this question. Why are you being such a prick? You started this thread and you have proceeded to insult almost everyone who has responded. That's what a prick does. Why are you doing that?

[Icarus]

Reality is subjective.  They could "move" by means not known or detectable to us at the moment.

So why not talk about the giant purple moose that causes tsunamis by farting? It could exist by a means not known or detectable to us at the moment.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

lulz..  i don't care.  just chuckling at the irony of you all dismissing philosophy when your country wouldn't exist without it..

What amuses me is the fact that ~99.99% of self-styled philosophers are simply idiots who are enthralled with their own "wit".

[the_antithesis]

This is stupid.