Not everyone gets the rock-star start of the magician from Galilee.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvcpQSetMgI
I ask that you please provide evidence to the contrary.
Just throwing this into the ring, from a signature here:
It's not like looking for a particular grain of sand.
You are that particular grain of sand, marveling at the fact that you exist, on a beach filled with sand.
The giant asterisk with that is the assumption that there are other grains of sand on the beach that are also coated with a thin film if living stuff.
I consider it to be well into the realm of absolute absurdity to think that we are the only place in the Universe where things meeting our definition of "life" exist. There are untold trillions of galaxies, each with many billions of stars, and it's looking more and more like most of them have planets in tow.
Creation scientists... oxymoron. Sort of strange that they feel they have to be able to "prove" the bible is true. I thought the whole point was to have faith in the face of the overwhelming evidence of its fictional ridiculousness?
The scientist in my sig was pointing out the absurdity of believing that we were not deliberately created given the astronomical odds against complex life 'just happeneing' here, and subsequent civilized intelligent life. I share that though-process.
Complex life didn't "just happen". The rules of physics and chemistry as they exist in our universe were followed every step of the way. We could deny gravity and say "everything just happens to fall down."The scientist in my sig was pointing out the absurdity of believing that we were not deliberately created given the astronomical odds against complex life 'just happeneing' here, and subsequent civilized intelligent life. I share that though-process.
It's selection bias. The anthropic principle takes care of that kind of reasoning.
Complex life didn't "just happen". The rules of physics and chemistry as they exist in our universe were followed every step of the way. We could deny gravity and say "everything just happens to fall down."
I know. And I was pointing out that that quote is just another instance of the puddle marveling at how its divot in the ground fits it so perfectly.The scientist in my sig was pointing out the absurdity of believing that we were not deliberately created given the astronomical odds against complex life 'just happeneing' here, and subsequent civilized intelligent life. I share that though-process.
Billions upon billions of stars.So what?I consider it to be well into the realm of absolute absurdity to think that we are the only place in the Universe where things meeting our definition of "life" exist. There are untold trillions of galaxies, each with many billions of stars, and it's looking more and more like most of them have planets in tow.
Billions of people believe in God, but that in and of itself doesn't mean he's real.
In a way, I can still think of that as true.Complex life didn't "just happen". The rules of physics and chemistry as they exist in our universe were followed every step of the way. We could deny gravity and say "everything just happens to fall down."
Billions upon billions of stars.
Billions upon billions of grains of sand.
We're living on one grain of sand with life on it, still scarcely able to even look at other grains of sand. That quote is stated as if from a perspective that is far beyond that grain of sand, somehow able to see all of them, and finding it to be amazing that we are the only one with life.
We are currently incapable of having that perspective, since we are currently confined to that particular grain of sand - and it's quite easy to find that grain when it's also your residence.
Doesn't look like it. While I have no reason to question his expertise in mathematics, physics, or astronomy, his biology and understanding of evolution is wanting. Panspermia has not been observed and given the fossil record the hypothesis is unnecessary to describing the evolution of life. His courtroom declaration concerning archeopteryx does his credibility no good at all.By "just happened" I mean without Divine guidance, or God.
Secondly, the statement originated with the scientist I quoted...send him an email explaining why his reasoning is flawed.
I'm quite sure he's billions of times more educated on the subject than either of you are, and made a very well educated statement.
Doesn't look like it. While I have no reason to question his expertise in mathematics, physics, or astronomy, his biology and understanding of evolution is wanting. Panspermia has not been observed and given the fossil record the hypothesis is unnecessary to describing the evolution of life. His courtroom declaration concerning archeopteryx does his credibility no good at all.
Yes, it's speculating, to a degree.My point stands, and you're speculating.
I could conversely state that you're assuming that just because one planet has life, there HAS to me more that have life. That doesn't make it automatically true...
1) This assumes that other life forms want to contact other life.while I agree that we're just starting out our search for other planets, you raise an interesting Paradox:
If the Universe is supposedly teeming with life, why haven't we been contacted yet? After all, it's been nearly 14 Billion years, about 4.5 for our planet. I can also assume on those grounds that space is just as empty as our solar system.
There's also a fair bit more effort going into understanding the cosmos than there is in determining the sand grain count on Earth.And fwiw, you're overstating your point. We can't even begin to put a ball-park number on all the grains of sand on all the beaches on this earth, but we do put numbers to the amount of stars and possible planets.
...created by an even more complex and amazing machine...one capable of creating not only a tiny planet with humans, but a Universe around it...?I'm not defending him...all I am saying is that we share a similar opinion. Just because someone doesn't fully understand evolution doesn't mean that that's why he believes in God, or assumes a Creator or what have you.
I would even argue that the more I learn about biology, the more I believe we were created. The human body is an amazing machine, IMO, and all machines I've come across are built.
Yes, it's speculating, to a degree.
My view is that, it happened once, here, on Earth, from cloud of dust to microorganisms in under 2 billion years, and from microorganisms to mutlicellulars in....I don't remember, let's say another 2 billion years.
One planet, among many, made out of ingredients that are common in stellar neighborhoods. (Look at what we're made out of: Mostly hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. What's our local environment made out of? It's also mostly hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen. Ok, still no surprises. What can you find a lot of in star systems? Hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen...the ingredients are all over the place.)
1) This assumes that other life forms want to contact other life.
2) And that they're talking in our direction.
3) And that they're close enough that a signal would still retain adequate strength for us to receive it.
4) And that they happened to be trying to contact us in a cosmological speck in time.
5) And that they are capable of doing it in the first place. (A planet full of microbes probably won't be making any attempts.)
6) And that we are capable of receiving it.
Try to communicate with an ant. How do you do it? Our ideas are incompatible with their brains. Try to teach a dog about tau neutrinos. Have a conversation with a dolphin about the use of hand tools. Tell a tropical fish about life in the frozen deserts of Antarctica.
Those are just life forms living on our own planet. How do you convey our ideas to them, particularly concepts that are utterly foreign to them? Verbal communication? What if they lack vocal cords? Or ears?
Maybe use written language? What if they don't have the ability to decipher symbols, and assign meaning to them?
We have ancient writings from our own species that we cannot translate, even with the aid of some cultural artifacts.
An alien signal may have reached us already, perhaps even bathing the planet since the field of radio astronomy began, yet we assume it to be the baseline or background noise, not knowing any better. (And who says it has to be a form of electromagnetic radiation in the first place.)
It could easily be so foreign to us that it would not be perceived as a communication attempt by an alien life form, no moreso than if you were to lay down some distinct chemical trails to try to communicate to an ant. It would see some unexpected chemical trails, follow them awhile, and go about its life as if nothing unusual had ever happened.
Pass through those filters, and you're left with a very slim chance of humanity even existing when an alien signal arrives, and being capable of receiving it, and being capable of interpreting it as a communication attempt.
Imagine if some powerful entity decided to use gravitational waves to communicate.
"Wow, these things are great! They travel over immense distances, and are impossible to miss!"
Huh, darn, if only we had a reliable, high-resolution means of detecting them.
...created by an even more complex and amazing machine...one capable of creating not only a tiny planet with humans, but a Universe around it...?
:hmm:
Where us Christians and the Darwinists disagree is in macro-evolution.
I'm quite sure he's billions of times more educated on the subject than either of you are, and made a very well educated statement.
Since when is an unsubstantiated claim on chance occurrence a "well-educated statement"? Honestly, given he -- just like the rest of us -- has no idea how many grains of sand exist in the universe shows that it's nothing but hyperbole.
There are many scientists that believe there was a Creator and that being was smart enough to have beings that evolve.
There are many scientific things that were said to be ridiculous and/or impossible that came to be.
You cannot disprove something.
I can accept that there may have been a creator who started life on this planet; we don't have any real answer as to where life came from, and this is just as likely as some other explanations. But it's a leap too far for me to say that because a God may exist and may have created life, or even us specifically, he expects certain things from us including worship. There's enough scientific evidence supporting evolutionary theory that I believe it; our species has slowly evolved over a period of billions of years. Even if I accept that God started everything in motion knowing it would lead to us, how can anyone purport to know the desires of this metaphysical being that we can't interact with? Why is it any more likely that God wants me to worship him than it is that God wants me to divert spending away from churches and towards science so we can more fully understand the majesty of the Universe he created? We can't know.
I don't have a problem with God, nor with people who believe in God. But people who claim to know what God wants? Those people are charlatans and liars, manipulating others through fear of divine retribution. Those people I could do without.
But then this kinda begs the question: "if God did jump start life, why doesn't he want us to at least know he did it?".
I mean, any intelligent being takes and, quite frankly, deserves credit for his handiwork.
I don't subscribe to religion's teaching that we were created to just end up burning forever -- that's not a god worthy of my recognition.
Needs less George and more hot babes.I don't discuss "faith" without a little help from my friend George.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu3VTngm1F0
Needs less George and more hot babes.