Alien Life? You better hope God exists!

[Boss]

all matter from the point of singularity is propelled at a finite angle where the trajectory will return the matter without a change in direction to its origin at the same time to recompact covering back to energy till completion and the next moment of cyclical singularity. 1895 was only half the equation.

Yep, your theory defies physics. Sorry!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth.

That's silly, there is no reason to say such a thing. You should say, "for there to be intelligent life EXACTLY as we have it today on Earth." And that being the case, you could leave out the word intelligent and still be correct.

etting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did,

No, because this is a fallacy often referred to as "Hoyle's fallacy". This is specious reasoning by which the probability of any event can be reduced to approach zero. ANY event. It is worthless unlogic. It's also a reiteration of another silly bit of specious reasoning, "Zeno's paradox".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

The OP just kind of pulled this one out of his ass:

These ocean worlds reveal just how little water we have on Earth

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

How can science promote a concept it can neither observe or duplicate?

By having mountains of theoretical evidence, of course, and by having absolutely no reason to think otherwise.. Have you ever seen the core of the Earth? Neither have scientists. Ever make yourself an earth core? Neither have scientists. Have you ever seen a black hole? No, and neither has anyone, ever, nor will anyone, ever.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then why did you use the word created? Why not accident?

Is it an accident when a flame creates steam from an ice cube? No.

 

[sealybobo]

I constantly hear the speculations over the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe from people who completely dismiss any possibility of a Creator God. I find this extraordinary to say the least. I know this thread will spark a contentious debate but I believe it's one well worth exploring. This, of course, is simply a matter of philosophy, which is why I chose the Religion and Ethics forum instead of Science and Technology. We have no evidence life exists anywhere but planet Earth.

I would like to set aside the various arguments for religious philosophies and focus on the aspects of logic and reason in examining the question at hand. Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? The primary argument to conclude that it likely does, relies on the sheer number of stars and planets. Because there are trillions of stars and each one is likely to have a rocky planet in a zone compatible for conditions of life, some will assume the possibility is very likely. I would like to disabuse you of this notion.

First of all, we have to consider that intelligent life on this planet is the result of many circumstances over the course of 4.5 billion years, if we are to believe the modern scientific theories regarding evolution, etc. We'll stick with the current scientific parameters as opposed to quirky young earth creationist dogma, and let's see how this works out.

We don't know how life originated. Whatever happened was extremely unusual and rare because it doesn't seem to be happening anymore and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else. But let's take for granted that some mysterious combinations in the forces of physics and nature combined at the perfect place and time to originate life on Earth. It seems reasonable to conclude the unique conditions of our planet may have contributed in some way, but they certainly contributed to the "evolution" of life once it had originated. Our wobbly orbit, caused by a careening body which formed our Moon, which fell into perfect geosynchronous orbit and caused tides and seasons to happen... all of which tremendously contribute to the sustainability of life and life cycles. The presence of abundant water in liquid form. A molten iron-nickel core which gives us a protective magnetic field. Atmospheric pressure which prevents our liquid source of water from evaporating into space. And dozens of other things which contribute to an environment conducive to life in general.

Logically, when we begin to narrow down the billions of possible planetary candidates which could even support life, the odds become exponentially less and less with each of these criteria applied. Okay, so maybe one in a billion planets could support life? That still means there is a good possibility it might exist elsewhere. But what form does it take? All we have to go by is what data we have here on Earth.

Nature, left to it's own evolution, produced a planet teaming with dinosaurs. Big giant lizards and flying reptiles... nothing approaching intelligent life. It took a rare cosmic event, supposedly an asteroid striking the planet and wiping out the dinosaurs but not wiping out all life forms. From there, the reemerging life spawned mammals which gave rise to primates and then humans. So now we have at least two distinct cosmic events of interaction, the moon collision and the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth. And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

Setting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did, for intelligent life to exist here? What would be the odds of those same events happening elsewhere? I believe it is all but impossible that another intelligent life form exists elsewhere unless there is a Creator. A force beyond the physical which intelligently set into motion the precise events and phenomenon which had to occur for intelligent life to emerge.

Let me make a couple points then continue reading because your post is long.

1. You forgot moons. There are more moons than planets and it’s possible life exists on some of them.

2. You act like intelligent life could have only happened the way it happened here. That’s just our history. There could be intelligence out there on a moon that never had dinosaurs.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Nothing to see here.

Just a trillion different coincidences

Correct, just like the existence, position, makeup, and state of every object in the entire universe. But you think you're "SPECIAL!", which clouds your judgments and renders your faculties impotent.

 

[sealybobo]

I constantly hear the speculations over the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe from people who completely dismiss any possibility of a Creator God. I find this extraordinary to say the least. I know this thread will spark a contentious debate but I believe it's one well worth exploring. This, of course, is simply a matter of philosophy, which is why I chose the Religion and Ethics forum instead of Science and Technology. We have no evidence life exists anywhere but planet Earth.

I would like to set aside the various arguments for religious philosophies and focus on the aspects of logic and reason in examining the question at hand. Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? The primary argument to conclude that it likely does, relies on the sheer number of stars and planets. Because there are trillions of stars and each one is likely to have a rocky planet in a zone compatible for conditions of life, some will assume the possibility is very likely. I would like to disabuse you of this notion.

First of all, we have to consider that intelligent life on this planet is the result of many circumstances over the course of 4.5 billion years, if we are to believe the modern scientific theories regarding evolution, etc. We'll stick with the current scientific parameters as opposed to quirky young earth creationist dogma, and let's see how this works out.

We don't know how life originated. Whatever happened was extremely unusual and rare because it doesn't seem to be happening anymore and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else. But let's take for granted that some mysterious combinations in the forces of physics and nature combined at the perfect place and time to originate life on Earth. It seems reasonable to conclude the unique conditions of our planet may have contributed in some way, but they certainly contributed to the "evolution" of life once it had originated. Our wobbly orbit, caused by a careening body which formed our Moon, which fell into perfect geosynchronous orbit and caused tides and seasons to happen... all of which tremendously contribute to the sustainability of life and life cycles. The presence of abundant water in liquid form. A molten iron-nickel core which gives us a protective magnetic field. Atmospheric pressure which prevents our liquid source of water from evaporating into space. And dozens of other things which contribute to an environment conducive to life in general.

Logically, when we begin to narrow down the billions of possible planetary candidates which could even support life, the odds become exponentially less and less with each of these criteria applied. Okay, so maybe one in a billion planets could support life? That still means there is a good possibility it might exist elsewhere. But what form does it take? All we have to go by is what data we have here on Earth.

Nature, left to it's own evolution, produced a planet teaming with dinosaurs. Big giant lizards and flying reptiles... nothing approaching intelligent life. It took a rare cosmic event, supposedly an asteroid striking the planet and wiping out the dinosaurs but not wiping out all life forms. From there, the reemerging life spawned mammals which gave rise to primates and then humans. So now we have at least two distinct cosmic events of interaction, the moon collision and the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth. And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

Setting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did, for intelligent life to exist here? What would be the odds of those same events happening elsewhere? I believe it is all but impossible that another intelligent life form exists elsewhere unless there is a Creator. A force beyond the physical which intelligently set into motion the precise events and phenomenon which had to occur for intelligent life to emerge.

3. New life might be popping up as we speak. Takes a long time to notice. I’m sorry there’s so much wrong with what you’re saying I wouldn’t know where to begin. I’ll keep reading

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else.

This is like a blind man rejecting the concept of colors...because, hey, never seen a color...

 

[sealybobo]

I constantly hear the speculations over the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe from people who completely dismiss any possibility of a Creator God. I find this extraordinary to say the least. I know this thread will spark a contentious debate but I believe it's one well worth exploring. This, of course, is simply a matter of philosophy, which is why I chose the Religion and Ethics forum instead of Science and Technology. We have no evidence life exists anywhere but planet Earth.

I would like to set aside the various arguments for religious philosophies and focus on the aspects of logic and reason in examining the question at hand. Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? The primary argument to conclude that it likely does, relies on the sheer number of stars and planets. Because there are trillions of stars and each one is likely to have a rocky planet in a zone compatible for conditions of life, some will assume the possibility is very likely. I would like to disabuse you of this notion.

First of all, we have to consider that intelligent life on this planet is the result of many circumstances over the course of 4.5 billion years, if we are to believe the modern scientific theories regarding evolution, etc. We'll stick with the current scientific parameters as opposed to quirky young earth creationist dogma, and let's see how this works out.

We don't know how life originated. Whatever happened was extremely unusual and rare because it doesn't seem to be happening anymore and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else. But let's take for granted that some mysterious combinations in the forces of physics and nature combined at the perfect place and time to originate life on Earth. It seems reasonable to conclude the unique conditions of our planet may have contributed in some way, but they certainly contributed to the "evolution" of life once it had originated. Our wobbly orbit, caused by a careening body which formed our Moon, which fell into perfect geosynchronous orbit and caused tides and seasons to happen... all of which tremendously contribute to the sustainability of life and life cycles. The presence of abundant water in liquid form. A molten iron-nickel core which gives us a protective magnetic field. Atmospheric pressure which prevents our liquid source of water from evaporating into space. And dozens of other things which contribute to an environment conducive to life in general.

Logically, when we begin to narrow down the billions of possible planetary candidates which could even support life, the odds become exponentially less and less with each of these criteria applied. Okay, so maybe one in a billion planets could support life? That still means there is a good possibility it might exist elsewhere. But what form does it take? All we have to go by is what data we have here on Earth.

Nature, left to it's own evolution, produced a planet teaming with dinosaurs. Big giant lizards and flying reptiles... nothing approaching intelligent life. It took a rare cosmic event, supposedly an asteroid striking the planet and wiping out the dinosaurs but not wiping out all life forms. From there, the reemerging life spawned mammals which gave rise to primates and then humans. So now we have at least two distinct cosmic events of interaction, the moon collision and the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth. And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

Setting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did, for intelligent life to exist here? What would be the odds of those same events happening elsewhere? I believe it is all but impossible that another intelligent life form exists elsewhere unless there is a Creator. A force beyond the physical which intelligently set into motion the precise events and phenomenon which had to occur for intelligent life to emerge.

So for you finding life elsewhere would confirm a god. Got it. You live on another planet.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This topic is garbage. The first post is nothing but a verbose, theatrical appeal to emotion to paper over that it is nothing but a reiteration of a specious argument that is, itself, a long-ago rejected mathematical concept.

I encourage evryone to look up both "Hoyle's Fallacy" and "Zeno's Paradox", specifically, "Tortoise and Achilles".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We may find that life is not only common but ubiquitous in the universe.

Of course, it is both, though such a thing may be hard to find. Would we know it, if we saw it?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

even if life evolved in only one instance in every galaxy then that is about 100 billion times.

Or, let's consider it another way:

We know it is possible for life to form. We know it has happened at least one time in the universe.

People want to employ silly statistical fallacies (like the first post and topic of the thread). Let's talk REAL probabilities not reliant on specious reasoning. What would we guess the odds are of life forming EXACTLY ONCE in our universe, in the lifespan of the universe? Not "zero times", not twice, not any number of times between 2 and 100 trillion, but exactly once.

There's your "statistical absurdity", folks. There's your "extreme outlier". Don't be distracted or fooled by the charlatans with their fallacies and shell games.

Though, to be fair, in multiverse theory such a universe is bound to exist. IN fact, an infinite number of them will exist.

 

[bgrouse]

People used to think some of those previously unproven things were the work of god, too, until proven otherwise.

Nothing has been proved otherwise. You mean, since we discovered how God did something? That doesn't disprove God did it.

The definition of science isn't "god did it unless we prove otherwise," which seems to be your position.

Nope, not my position and I never said anything remotely close. You seem to suffer from a comprehension problem. God did everything unless you can prove otherwise, that's a given. That's why I never understood why you think anyone is claiming that is science... It's an altruism, not science. It has no scientific explanatory value.

So who created the creator? Surely if a creator is needed for intelligent life to exist, then a creator is even more needed to create something as powerful and intelligent as "the creator."

"Created" is a word we apply to physical things in a physical universe. A Spiritual Creator doesn't require physical creation. Can you use this same reasoning and explain to me what created physical nature?

Why do you think physical nature was "created?" It may have always existed (and existed in such a way as to eventually bring about the existence of intelligent life). After all, you have no trouble believing in a "creator," saying it doesn't need to have been created (implying it has always existed), despite never having any evidence of it (visible with the naked eye or otherwise). Maybe nature always existed. That's far easier to believe since nature is proven to exist.

Well, I think physical nature was created because the universe is in motion and I believe in Newtonian physics. The universe had a beginning about 14.5 billion years ago, at best guess. BUT... For the sake of philosophy, if you want to believe the universe is eternal and has always existed, that's fine too... You've just defined Divinity.

And again, I'm not trying to claim some double standard with spiritual nature not having to be created. I explained that "create" is a word we use to define bringing into physical existence. Spiritual things do not require being brought into physical existence or they would be physical in nature and not spiritual.

As for evidence, I have plenty of evidence for spiritual nature but it's spiritual evidence and you don't accept it. This doesn't mean it doesn't exist or I don't have it. And things do not have to be "visible to the naked eye or otherwise" in order to exist. Go look into the sky on this bright clear day.... do you see the stars? They are there, you just can't see them. At the subatomic level, electrons appear and disappear or have presence in two places at the same time. There are many things in our physical universe that can't be seen but are still there.

Sounds like a double standard to me. Nature must have been created, but god doesn't have to have been created. You say you believe in Newtonian physics, but you really don't since you apply them arbitrarily as it suits you (to nature, not to god, since god isn't "physical").

You're using science like a blunt object against others, but your made up god is off limits to it.

 

[BreezeWood]

all matter from the point of singularity is propelled at a finite angle where the trajectory will return the matter without a change in direction to its origin at the same time to recompact covering back to energy till completion and the next moment of cyclical singularity. 1895 was only half the equation.

Yep, your theory defies physics. Sorry!

.

Yep, your theory defies physics. Sorry!

my theory is physics, -

the only thing sorry is a black redneck living in alabama - my guess is you voted for moor - just like voting for his daddy. dt. go back to your roots, the 4th century holocaust. you belong there.

 

[tyroneweaver]

I constantly hear the speculations over the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe from people who completely dismiss any possibility of a Creator God. I find this extraordinary to say the least. I know this thread will spark a contentious debate but I believe it's one well worth exploring. This, of course, is simply a matter of philosophy, which is why I chose the Religion and Ethics forum instead of Science and Technology. We have no evidence life exists anywhere but planet Earth.

I would like to set aside the various arguments for religious philosophies and focus on the aspects of logic and reason in examining the question at hand. Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? The primary argument to conclude that it likely does, relies on the sheer number of stars and planets. Because there are trillions of stars and each one is likely to have a rocky planet in a zone compatible for conditions of life, some will assume the possibility is very likely. I would like to disabuse you of this notion.

First of all, we have to consider that intelligent life on this planet is the result of many circumstances over the course of 4.5 billion years, if we are to believe the modern scientific theories regarding evolution, etc. We'll stick with the current scientific parameters as opposed to quirky young earth creationist dogma, and let's see how this works out.

We don't know how life originated. Whatever happened was extremely unusual and rare because it doesn't seem to be happening anymore and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else. But let's take for granted that some mysterious combinations in the forces of physics and nature combined at the perfect place and time to originate life on Earth. It seems reasonable to conclude the unique conditions of our planet may have contributed in some way, but they certainly contributed to the "evolution" of life once it had originated. Our wobbly orbit, caused by a careening body which formed our Moon, which fell into perfect geosynchronous orbit and caused tides and seasons to happen... all of which tremendously contribute to the sustainability of life and life cycles. The presence of abundant water in liquid form. A molten iron-nickel core which gives us a protective magnetic field. Atmospheric pressure which prevents our liquid source of water from evaporating into space. And dozens of other things which contribute to an environment conducive to life in general.

Logically, when we begin to narrow down the billions of possible planetary candidates which could even support life, the odds become exponentially less and less with each of these criteria applied. Okay, so maybe one in a billion planets could support life? That still means there is a good possibility it might exist elsewhere. But what form does it take? All we have to go by is what data we have here on Earth.

Nature, left to it's own evolution, produced a planet teaming with dinosaurs. Big giant lizards and flying reptiles... nothing approaching intelligent life. It took a rare cosmic event, supposedly an asteroid striking the planet and wiping out the dinosaurs but not wiping out all life forms. From there, the reemerging life spawned mammals which gave rise to primates and then humans. So now we have at least two distinct cosmic events of interaction, the moon collision and the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth. And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

Setting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did, for intelligent life to exist here? What would be the odds of those same events happening elsewhere? I believe it is all but impossible that another intelligent life form exists elsewhere unless there is a Creator. A force beyond the physical which intelligently set into motion the precise events and phenomenon which had to occur for intelligent life to emerge.

Ever notice a rain drop is large enough it don't evaporate before it hits the earth yet is not so big that it destroys stuff if it was.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ever notice a rain drop is large enough it don't evaporate before it hits the earth yet is not so big that it destroys stuff if it was.

I have, but have you ever noticed how tornadoes, hurricanes, hail, thunderstorms, and floods are always messing everything up?

 

[sealybobo]

I constantly hear the speculations over the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe from people who completely dismiss any possibility of a Creator God. I find this extraordinary to say the least. I know this thread will spark a contentious debate but I believe it's one well worth exploring. This, of course, is simply a matter of philosophy, which is why I chose the Religion and Ethics forum instead of Science and Technology. We have no evidence life exists anywhere but planet Earth.

I would like to set aside the various arguments for religious philosophies and focus on the aspects of logic and reason in examining the question at hand. Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? The primary argument to conclude that it likely does, relies on the sheer number of stars and planets. Because there are trillions of stars and each one is likely to have a rocky planet in a zone compatible for conditions of life, some will assume the possibility is very likely. I would like to disabuse you of this notion.

First of all, we have to consider that intelligent life on this planet is the result of many circumstances over the course of 4.5 billion years, if we are to believe the modern scientific theories regarding evolution, etc. We'll stick with the current scientific parameters as opposed to quirky young earth creationist dogma, and let's see how this works out.

We don't know how life originated. Whatever happened was extremely unusual and rare because it doesn't seem to be happening anymore and there is no evidence of it happening anywhere else. But let's take for granted that some mysterious combinations in the forces of physics and nature combined at the perfect place and time to originate life on Earth. It seems reasonable to conclude the unique conditions of our planet may have contributed in some way, but they certainly contributed to the "evolution" of life once it had originated. Our wobbly orbit, caused by a careening body which formed our Moon, which fell into perfect geosynchronous orbit and caused tides and seasons to happen... all of which tremendously contribute to the sustainability of life and life cycles. The presence of abundant water in liquid form. A molten iron-nickel core which gives us a protective magnetic field. Atmospheric pressure which prevents our liquid source of water from evaporating into space. And dozens of other things which contribute to an environment conducive to life in general.

Logically, when we begin to narrow down the billions of possible planetary candidates which could even support life, the odds become exponentially less and less with each of these criteria applied. Okay, so maybe one in a billion planets could support life? That still means there is a good possibility it might exist elsewhere. But what form does it take? All we have to go by is what data we have here on Earth.

Nature, left to it's own evolution, produced a planet teaming with dinosaurs. Big giant lizards and flying reptiles... nothing approaching intelligent life. It took a rare cosmic event, supposedly an asteroid striking the planet and wiping out the dinosaurs but not wiping out all life forms. From there, the reemerging life spawned mammals which gave rise to primates and then humans. So now we have at least two distinct cosmic events of interaction, the moon collision and the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, which had to happen at a precise point in time for there to be any form of intelligent life on Earth. And that is if you don't count whatever cosmic phenomenon gave us all the water while no other planets around us seemed to get any.

Setting aside religion, at some point, don't you have to consider the number of miraculous events which had to happen as they did, for intelligent life to exist here? What would be the odds of those same events happening elsewhere? I believe it is all but impossible that another intelligent life form exists elsewhere unless there is a Creator. A force beyond the physical which intelligently set into motion the precise events and phenomenon which had to occur for intelligent life to emerge.

With how big the universe is and how technologically unadvanced as we are saying you believe there is no other life in the universe is like scooping out a cup of water out of the ocean and concluding there are no whales.

 

[Boss]

With how big the universe is and how technologically unadvanced as we are saying you believe there is no other life in the universe is like scooping out a cup of water out of the ocean and concluding there are no whales.

Not really. I'm not making a definitive statement. I am merely entertaining logical thought process regarding possibilities and probabilities. We see life on Earth but there are literally dozens, if not hundreds, of variables in play. Things we cannot even know if life would even be possible without on another planet. You can't just assume that because life exists here, it must exist elsewhere.

Again.... I am not saying that I believe there isn't life elsewhere in the universe. What I am saying is, IF there is life elsewhere, it lends validity to an argument for a Creator who orchestrated the parameters in which to make the life possible.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

IF there is life elsewhere, it lends validity to an argument for a Creator who orchestrated the parameters in which to make the life possible.

No, it would argue precisely the opposite. It would tell us that life likely formed to some degree and failed on literally trillions of other bodies in the universe, showing us that there is no "purpose" or "direction" to selection by physical forces.