CDZ Another "Evolution" Question

[there4eyeM]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

We're "special," are we?

We are the very essence, the meaning of special. Without us, we humans, 'special' wouldn't exist. So, we are all that special could be.
In addition, given the conditions, especially at the quantum level, so incredibly specific to the success of life, it is easy to see why some are taken with the idea that it is the work of 'God'.
Unfortunately, that noun, 'God', is currently useless as a term of discussion in a forum such as this. It is hoped that you 'catch the drift'.

 

[there4eyeM]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

We're "special," are we?

I have no idea. I like to think we are not. I just think that is a very real possibility that should be discussed.
Somewhere far away could be crawling with life as we speak. It just isnt intelligent yet.
Hopefully we will know one day.
Of course, i am always considering different possibilities. I consider us being an alien experiment a possibility lol.

"As we speak" is 'now'. Is it the same 'now' throughout the universe? Can it ever be anything but 'now'? Doesn't that mean that it is always the same time everywhere? Wouldn't that mean that all that happens 'now' happens for everywhere?

 

[TNHarley]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

We're "special," are we?

I have no idea. I like to think we are not. I just think that is a very real possibility that should be discussed.
Somewhere far away could be crawling with life as we speak. It just isnt intelligent yet.
Hopefully we will know one day.
Of course, i am always considering different possibilities. I consider us being an alien experiment a possibility lol.

"As we speak" is 'now'. Is it the same 'now' throughout the universe? Can it ever be anything but 'now'? Doesn't that mean that it is always the same time everywhere? Wouldn't that mean that all that happens 'now' happens for everywhere?

Is there a way to define a universal present?

 

[IsaacNewton]

The variables are many.

Life has existed on Earth for 3.5 billion years. It is only in the last 300,000 that we can say 'intelligent' life has existed. And that only came about because of the extinction event 65 million years ago that cleared the planet of the dinosaurs, with which mammals could not compete and win. There is no 'rule' that life has to evolve or progress as it has on Earth. There was an extinction event 252 million years ago where likely 95% of all life on Earth died out. Life hung by the thinnest of threads for the next 5-10 million years.

We've concluded so far that life is pretty rare in the universe. It is more than possible that on planets where it has arose some catastrophe wiped it out somewhere along the long path to consciousness.

The time scales and variables are just on too epic a scale to conclude why we have not heard from or contacted other intelligent life yet. Also, it's been less than 100 years that we've been sending radio and tv signals out there. As noted in other posts that is like sitting on a single atom in an ocean and having made a ripple so small it's only reached as far as a grain of sand away.

The only real argument against other 'intelligent' life is if the universe has been in existence for the last 14 billion years, surely there have been SOME life that got to the intelligent stage and sent signals out into space and likely that has been going on across the universe across that great expanse of time and we should hear SOMETHING. But we haven't.

That is puzzling and troublesome.

 

[there4eyeM]

...Or, puzzling and entertaining.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Aliens will come to serve man ...

It's a cookbook!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I am not opposed to the theory of evolution or any other scientific inquiry, but I was pondering the fact that we have not discovered any evidence of life on other planets in our solar system. It seems curious that truly spontaneous life would be so limited to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth. In addition, it appears probable that at least 99.99% of the universe is utterly devoid of any life forms. What does this say about the Big Bang theory? Was an inevitable development of life built into this process, or is it a unique response to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth?

Water is the key to life

It exists in liquid form between 32 and 212 degrees F
Most planets can’t support that

Carbon based.
Can life be silicon based?
Who knows?
We (earth) spends more money on defending crazy religions than on understanding the Universe and how we got here.

You "evolved" from an ape

 

[Weatherman2020]

I am not opposed to the theory of evolution or any other scientific inquiry, but I was pondering the fact that we have not discovered any evidence of life on other planets in our solar system. It seems curious that truly spontaneous life would be so limited to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth. In addition, it appears probable that at least 99.99% of the universe is utterly devoid of any life forms. What does this say about the Big Bang theory? Was an inevitable development of life built into this process, or is it a unique response to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth?

I missed that day in Physics when they said chaos naturally evolves into order.

 

[there4eyeM]

Chaos and order are one, Grasshopper.

 

[fncceo]

Aliens will come to serve man ...

It's a cookbook!!

Ahhh! Spoiler alert!

 

[Picaro]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

And there is also no reason at all for assuming it exists anywhere else but here.

 

[Picaro]

I should live long enough, but when we find coral, jellyfish, octopus and shrimps in the seas of Europa I want to revisit this stupid idea of "Evolution". If it's "true", then there are no odds at all that the same types of creatures should develop on 2 separate worlds. It should be mathematically impossible, it's a number with 100,000 zeros to 1, that "Random mutations" evolved similar creatures.

But if there's an intelligence behind creation, that would be a more reasonable explanation

Mutations are themselves highly unlikely to be beneficial; it would be an extremely rare thing, and that makes the odds far more improbable. Mutations are harmful the vast bulk of the time.

 

[Syriusly]

I am not opposed to the theory of evolution or any other scientific inquiry, but I was pondering the fact that we have not discovered any evidence of life on other planets in our solar system. It seems curious that truly spontaneous life would be so limited to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth. In addition, it appears probable that at least 99.99% of the universe is utterly devoid of any life forms. What does this say about the Big Bang theory? Was an inevitable development of life built into this process, or is it a unique response to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth?

You don't seem to understand the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution doesn't have anything to do with why life is on earth- or why it is- or is not on other planets.

In other words- there could be a Galactic Johnny Appleseed going around planting primitive bacteria on planets all over the galaxy- and that would neither validate or invalidate the The Theory of Evolution. Or life could be unique to Earth- and that also would neither invalidate or validate the The of Evolution.

Frankly its like asking about the The Theory of Gravity and asking what does this say about the Theory of Evolution.

Oh and of course none of this has anything to do with the Big Bang Theory either.

 

[TNHarley]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

And there is also no reason at all for assuming it exists anywhere else but here.

I dont assume, i question.
I do however think its silly to ignore the possibility.

 

[jwoodie]

There are people who don't want to believe life exists elsewhere, and their reasons are clear. But for anyone to say with certainty that it does not, is narcissistic delusion in the extreme.

The same is true for people who say with certainty that it does.

 

[jwoodie]

I am not opposed to the theory of evolution or any other scientific inquiry, but I was pondering the fact that we have not discovered any evidence of life on other planets in our solar system. It seems curious that truly spontaneous life would be so limited to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth. In addition, it appears probable that at least 99.99% of the universe is utterly devoid of any life forms. What does this say about the Big Bang theory? Was an inevitable development of life built into this process, or is it a unique response to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth?

You don't seem to understand the theory of evolution.

You don't seem to understand my post.

 

[Picaro]

I am not opposed to the theory of evolution or any other scientific inquiry, but I was pondering the fact that we have not discovered any evidence of life on other planets in our solar system. It seems curious that truly spontaneous life would be so limited to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth. In addition, it appears probable that at least 99.99% of the universe is utterly devoid of any life forms. What does this say about the Big Bang theory? Was an inevitable development of life built into this process, or is it a unique response to a unique set of conditions that exist only on Earth?

I missed that day in Physics when they said chaos naturally evolves into order.

It was one of the more hilarious moments in the 'big debate' when atheist psycho Dawkins effectively said that "okay, yeah, at first it was all chaos n Stuff, but then it became ordered and intelligent', but uh, randomly". I still can't read that argument without cracking up. Just more evidence 'rationalists' aren't remotely 'rational', just idiots with agendas trying to sell circular logic as 'reality'.

 

[Picaro]

Rarely do i see anyone consider the possibility that Earth houses the first life in the Universe.

And there is also no reason at all for assuming it exists anywhere else but here.

I dont assume, i question.
I do however think its silly to ignore the possibility.

The possibility can be noted, and then it can be dismissed as highly unlikely. That isn't 'ignoring' it. Probability isn't empirical science, it's guessing; just because something might 'possibly exist', doesn't mean it does.

Did the universe you perceive change any when yet another day passed without other life being found?

 

[there4eyeM]

It is obvious that sexual activity between members of the same sex in a species happens. That is life. Life is 'normal', it is nature being nature. The fact that, in humans, only a small minority are involved makes it uncommon. That is not the same as "abnormal" unless someone with an agenda chooses to see it thus.
In general, humans do manipulate their environment in order to feel better. Observing that, in a culture that is repressive to exception in its citizens, a minority makes efforts to console itself should not surprise the observer who has no agenda.

 

[Picaro]

It is obvious that sexual activity between members of the same sex in a species happens. That is life. Life is 'normal', it is nature being nature. The fact that, in humans, only a small minority are involved makes it uncommon. That is not the same as "abnormal" unless someone with an agenda chooses to see it thus.
In general, humans do manipulate their environment in order to feel better. Observing that, in a culture that is repressive to exception in its citizens, a minority makes efforts to console itself should not surprise the observer who has no agenda.

Fetishes are not 'normal' just because they exist. they are clearly mental disorders. They only question is whether or not they are primary or associative disorders. So far we know they aren't 'genetic', nobody has been proven to be 'born that way', a ludicrous claim the keeps popping up despite no evidence at all for it, and those affected by them exhibit more bizarre and harmful behaviors beyond mere compulsions to commit certain sex acts, some more extreme than others but still fairly consistent patterns. One can claim anything is 'normal' if the mere proof is that something exists. Shoving nails into your eyes is 'normal' by the definition cited.