Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-26-2019 7:54 AM
28 online now:
AZPaul3, marc9000, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), vimesey (5 members, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,247 Year: 5,284/19,786 Month: 1,406/873 Week: 302/460 Day: 2/52 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
15NextFF
Author Topic:   the source of life
homunculus
Member (Idle past 3547 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 1 of 211 (495335)
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


I have an interesting assertion concerning the phenomenon of life.

First, I would like to give attention to the observational control that it is necessary for organic life to produce life. Not having laid claim to the impossibility of spontaneous self-generating organic bio genesis, but the observational rule is dependent on an organic source for life, requiring something living to produce and give life.

Then, earths sole bearing of organic life in the known universe. It is the observational control that earth houses the only organic life in the known space. Again, not having claimed impossibility to the contrary.

The trouble with bio genesis is identifying the substantial variables. If organic life is capable of spontaneous generation, then we would see it today, assuming, and certainly on other planets, spawning from non living materials. Looking at earths homing scenarios, we arrive to one of three conclusions:


    1) Earths global positioning, bio climatic temperatures and atmosphere allows life window of opportune growth and generation.

    2) Through continuous adaptation and 'evolution' life became fitted for survival on the planet and continued to regenerate and means of infestation. or

    3) Meaningful providence; we were placed here by design for a super natural reasoning.

The trouble with the observations is, in the realm of spontaneous generation and adaptation or "evolution" it would require that organic life generate from 'lifeless' matter or energy (non organic or intelligent functioning) again. The suggestion would require observation as to substantiate the supposed. That is to say, life does not generate from lifeless matter or energy today. Why would it years ago?, and supposing, the observational universe does not hold claim to spontaneous generation anywhere. Not intelligent life, nor animal life, nor plant life, nor bacteria, nor organic life of any fashion. Including, the earths position setting to fit life. The circumstances fitting on the earth to maintain just such a delicate and meticulous balance of climate, atmosphere and solar distance is so particular on an astronomical level, the "crack" of life's survival is ridiculous. The oceans keeping such a gentle tide with the shore, the slightest gravitational interference would be catastrophic. My guess is that scientists, especially those that favor evolution, are looking desperately for life on other planets. My guess is they wont find it.

Not minding that even if such life exists, that wouldn't prove one thing or another, but lack thereof gives testimony to providence and supernatural intercession.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines between paragraphs and broke the list items out of the paragraph.

Edited by the overmind, : No reason given.

Edited by homunculus, : lack of appreciation for illustration.
lets be sure to skip the point of topic and go straight for the monotonous. i did not certify the comment, i pulled it out of my back side to illustrate earths unstable ecosystem and thin astronomical contingency.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-22-2009 2:30 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 4 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-23-2009 4:47 AM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 6 by anglagard, posted 01-23-2009 4:59 AM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 7 by Larni, posted 01-23-2009 5:10 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 8 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 5:31 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 9 by Huntard, posted 01-23-2009 5:48 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 10 by Dr Jack, posted 01-23-2009 6:03 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 11 by Granny Magda, posted 01-23-2009 8:50 AM homunculus has responded
 Message 12 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 11:40 AM homunculus has not yet responded
 Message 15 by bluescat48, posted 01-23-2009 2:05 PM homunculus has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 211 (495345)
01-22-2009 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


I tweaked the formatting some, but more fixes are needed
See the "Edited by" notes. Reading is easier if you have blank lines between paragraphs.

One thing I didn't do, is fix your messages massive lack of proper capitalization. Sentences should start with upper case letters, as should "I" and proper nouns (use those "shift" keys on your keyboard - They are so important that keyboards are manufactured to have two of them). Please also do such in your other messages.

Fix the capital letters and then I'll actually bother reading the content of your message.

Please post a "capital letters done" type message, as a reply to my message. That will bring the repair job to my attention.

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Report a problem etc. type topics:
Report Technical Problems Here: No. 1
Report Discussion Problems Here: No. 2
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC

Admin writes:

It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.

There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.

Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:24 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

    
homunculus
Member (Idle past 3547 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 3 of 211 (495415)
01-22-2009 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Adminnemooseus
01-22-2009 2:30 AM


Re: I tweaked the formatting some, but more fixes are needed
"capital letters done"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-22-2009 2:30 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 4 of 211 (495509)
01-23-2009 4:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Strikes me as a mixture of cosmology and origin of liife - Promoted anyway
Another one that I predict will be a big mess.

1 mile closer to the sun we would burn up, 1 mile further away we would freeze.

Absolute nonsense! The Earth's orbit is an ellipse with a much greater variability than that.

I'm getting soft - Topic promoted.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 211 (495510)
01-23-2009 4:48 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 6 of 211 (495512)
01-23-2009 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Poor State of Education
homunculus writes:

Figurative to illustrate; 1 mile closer to the sun we would burn up, 1 mile further away we would freeze.

This is too easy but I am in an onery mood.

Do you realize ignorance is curable through education?

In your case I would start with basic physics and astronomy as taught in elementary school.

Do you know what this means? If not use a dictionary.

Orbital Characteristics
epoch J2000
aphelion 152,097,701 km ,1.0167103335 AU
perihelion 147,098,074 km , 0.9832898912 AU

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Orbit


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has not yet responded

    
Larni
Member
Posts: 3976
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 7 of 211 (495514)
01-23-2009 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Goldilocks
You do realise that life can flourish in the most extreme place?

Take a look at extremophiles for example:

wiki writes:

An extremophile (from Latin extremus meaning "extreme" and Greek philiā (φιλία) meaning "love") is an organism that thrives in and may even require physically or geochemically extreme conditions that are detrimental to the majority of life on Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile

Are you aware of the size of the Sol Goldilocks zone?

wiki writes:

In our own solar system, the circumstellar habitable zone (CHZ) is thought to extend from a distance of 0.95 to 1.37 astronomical units (about 40 million miles).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_zone

Edited by me for clarity of point.

Scroll down to the criticism of this concept, too.

Blows you assertation out of space, no?

Edited by Larni, : Theatrical trailer, commentary with author and producer.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 2:06 AM Larni has not yet responded
 Message 203 by traste, posted 02-10-2009 7:30 AM Larni has responded

    
Annafan
Member (Idle past 2690 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 8 of 211 (495515)
01-23-2009 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Hi Homunculus! Welcome to EvC.

Let me give you some things to consider, concerning your remarks:

First, I would like to give attention to the observational control that it is necessary for organic life to produce life. Not having laid claim to the impossibility of spontaneous self-generating organic bio genesis, but the observational rule is dependent on an organic source for life, requiring something living to produce and give life.

Well, we do have some observation to suggest that life can indeed come from non-life: when we start digging into the earth's layers, the deeper you go (back in time), the less complex the remains of lifeforms seem to become. The trend is obvious. Until at some point NO remains can be found anymore. In the absence of evidence for some creator (aliens or Gods or whatever), this leads to the conclusion that first there must have been only "non-life", which somehow brought on "life". That is simply what the evidence tells us at this point.

The trouble with bio genesis is identifying the substantial variables. If organic life is capable of spontaneous generation, then we would see it today

This is less obvious than it may seem. One thing to consider is that life itself has greatly transformed the environment. The earth looks completely different from what it might have looked like at the time when abiogenesis supposedly happened. The oxygen in the atmosphere, for one, would not be here without life, but there are countless other examples. It might very well be that life metaphorically "kicks away the ladder on which it stands"; i.e. it destroys the circumstances that were suitable for giving rise to it.

Another thing to consider is that any new lifeform that tries to come into being, is faced with fearce competition from life that has had a headstart of billions of years of evolution to adapt to its environment. This in contrast with the first life which had NO competition at all. It might be practically impossible to overcome that burden.

We don't know these things for sure, but they are certainly reasonable considerations.

and supposing, the observational universe does not hold claim to spontaneous generation anywhere.

I wouldn't use this as an argument. Let's say you're sitting in your chair watching TV when you suddenly remember that you lost your carkeys. Your look around on your chair without leaving it, you search your pockets... but don't find any keys.

Would you jump to the definitive conclusion that you lost your keys forever?

Of course not! You haven't even stood up from your chair. You didn't look behind all the furniture in the room. You haven't looked in the car. You haven't checked out your trousers in the washing machine. Etc. etc.

The point is: it makes little sense to declare that life/abiogenesis are unique, when we haven't even properly checked out our own solarsystem, let alone the billions and billions of other solarsystems we now know are out there.

The circumstances fitting on the earth to maintain just such a delicate and meticulous balance of climate, atmosphere and solar distance is so particular on an astronomical level, the "crack" of life's survival is ridiculous.

There isn't anything particularly surprising about these seemingly special circumstances. For an intelligent species like us the exist, they must first be available. Without this prerequisite, no selfconsciousness would be around to wonder about it all. This is called the weak anthropic principle. It means that, without more data, we can not come to any reasonable conlusion at all about our circumstances being special or not, based on this experience alone.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 3:30 AM Annafan has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 406 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 9 of 211 (495521)
01-23-2009 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Wrong way round
Homunculus, you've got it the wrong way round. The Earth doesn't fit life perfectly, life fits the Earth perfectly.


I hunt for the truth
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 3:33 AM Huntard has responded

    
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 216 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 10 of 211 (495522)
01-23-2009 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


If organic life is capable of spontaneous generation, then we would see it today, assuming, and certainly on other planets, spawning from non living materials.

No, we wouldn't.

I'll deal with the Earth first. Imagine the first replicator, a humble string of amino acids that by luck happens to, under just the right circumstances, be able to string free floating amino acids together into another copy of itself. Let's suppose it was formed near a hydrothermal vent.

What do you think will happen to that fragile string of amino acids when a highly developed cell such as a bacteria stumbles upon it? Do the words 'Nom nom nom' mean anything to you?

Now, suppose this same string formed on another planet. How, do you think, would we know?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 3:41 AM Dr Jack has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 2 days)
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 11 of 211 (495543)
01-23-2009 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Woah! Slow Down That Rush to Judgement!
Hi homunculus, I have to say, I like your new name a lot better than the old one.

quote:
If organic life is capable of spontaneous generation, then we would see it today, assuming, and certainly on other planets, spawning from non living materials.

Not if the chemistry of the early Earth was very different to today's Earth's. A very special chemical environment was needed, an environment that no longer exists here. As for other planets, who knows what might be out there. Right now, we can barely detect extra-solar planets, even the massive gas giants. Finding life on them would be a tough call. At bit soon to call off the search I would have said.

quote:

1) Earths global positioning, bio climatic temperatures and atmosphere allows life window of opportune growth and generation.

2) Through continuous adaptation and 'evolution' life became fitted for survival on the planet and continued to regenerate and means of infestation. or

3) Meaningful providence; we were placed here by design for a super natural reasoning.


Why the "or" at the end of #2? There is no reason, theoretically at least, why God could not have created us by means of evolution. God could have placed our planet in the habitable zone around the sun, kick-started life and left it to evolve. Where's the beef?

quote:
The trouble with the observations is, in the realm of spontaneous generation and adaptation or "evolution" it would require that organic life generate from 'lifeless' matter or energy (non organic or intelligent functioning) again

I don't think you quite understand what is meant by "organic" in this context. Organic chemistry does not necessarily involve life. You can have organic compounds without life. There are organic compounds in space. Take a look at this wiki page, it might help clear this up.

wiki writes:

The original definition of "organic" chemistry came from the misconception that organic compounds were always related to life processes. However, organic molecules can be produced by processes not involving life. Life as we know it also depends on inorganic chemistry. For example, many enzymes rely on transition metals such as iron and copper; and materials such as shells, teeth and bones are part organic, part inorganic in composition. Apart from elemental carbon, only certain classes of carbon compounds (such as oxides, carbonates, and carbides) are conventionally considered inorganic. Biochemistry deals mainly with the natural chemistry of biomolecules such as proteins, nucleic acids, and sugars.

Source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_chemistry

quote:
My guess is that scientists, especially those that favor evolution, are looking desperately for life on other planets. My guess is they wont find it.

Given the recent discovery of methane on Mars, methane that could possibly be created by living things, this is a pretty bad time to be making such bets I'd say.

Mutate and Survive


"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 4:27 AM Granny Magda has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 211 (495562)
01-23-2009 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Have you ever heard of the Fine Tuned Universe argument or the Anthropic Principle?

You post sounds like a long winded combination of those.

You can read up on the criticisms in those links.

I think your error is best exeplified by this analogy:

You are looking at a puddle and concluding that the pothole must have been designed to perfectly fit around the water.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : see message 13


Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence.
Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith.
Science has failed our world.
Science has failed our Mother Earth.
-System of a Down, "Science"

He who makes a beast out of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man.
-Avenged Sevenfold, "Bat Country"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Huntard, posted 01-23-2009 12:17 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 406 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 13 of 211 (495570)
01-23-2009 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by New Cat's Eye
01-23-2009 11:40 AM


Hey CS shouldn't this:
Catholic Scientist writes:

You are looking at a puddle and concluding that the water in it must have been designed to perfectly fit the pothole.


Be: "You are looking at a puddle and concluding that the pothole must have been designed to perfectly fit the water in it"?


I hunt for the truth
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 11:40 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 12:53 PM Huntard has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 211 (495576)
01-23-2009 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Huntard
01-23-2009 12:17 PM


Hey CS shouldn't this:
Catholic Scientist writes:

You are looking at a puddle and concluding that the water in it must have been designed to perfectly fit the pothole.


Be: "You are looking at a puddle and concluding that the pothole must have been designed to perfectly fit the water in it"?

Yeah, I fucked that one up.

Thanks for pointing it out. I edited my post.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Huntard, posted 01-23-2009 12:17 PM Huntard has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2301 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 15 of 211 (495588)
01-23-2009 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Figurative to illustrate; 1 mile closer to the sun we would burn up, 1 mile further away we would freeze.

Where did you pick up this statement which is totally debunked before it is stated. Since the earth's orbit is an ellipse with the sun a on focus, there is about a 3 million mile difference in distance at the aphelion to the perihelion, aphelion 94.5 million miles, perihelion 91.5 million miles. That is a lot more than 1. Your point sound like a hovindism (something stupid that Kent Hovind would say)


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by dwise1, posted 01-23-2009 10:47 PM bluescat48 has responded

    
1
23456
...
15NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019