CDZ Three unanswered yet interesting questions pertaining to life

[jillian]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

if this is yet another proselytizing thread, it probably belongs in the myriad of discussions in the religion section where people who believe certain things try to pretend they can convince people who do not believe in those things and have not asked to be preached to, that they *should* believe in those things.

all the while, substituting "faith" which has no evidence, for fact.

it's not that i don't respect your belief. t's that everyone believes they are correct in their beliefs or lack thereof.

hence the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong has at its foundation an arrogance that is truly off-putting to anyone but those who share your belief set.

You do not know my belief set. I believe in evolution if your hinting that I believe in creationism. So why this reaction to 3 very big and still mysterious leaps in evolution, that evolutionary biologists debate all the time?

And no this does not belong under religion and ethics, it belongs under science!! That is what it is, stop dismissing what you don't like as religion, your as worse than 5000 year old earth people.

if you are not a creationist, then why these questions? you should understand that we have a lot of knowledge and don't yet have scientific evidence as to that period immediately preceding the big bang.

so again, i'm not sure why you open the floor to the usual "your belief in science is faith just like religion" nonsense.

 

[RWS]

Mmmmmkay. The aliems didit. Case closed!

Yep. And your theory is...?

Intelligent alien life in close enough proximity to us is made increasingly rare by the second question I posed. How does the simple prokaryotic cell who has reached its energy threshold gain the ability to become more complex, which requires more energy, to attain more energy you need to become more complex, to become more complex you need to attain more energy, and so on and so forth. It's a jump so rare, that it has only happened once on earth. Will we find other life out there, hopefully, but chances are it will be quite boring prokaryotic cells. Is there intelligent life out there, probably, but also probably very rare and far apart. So that does not become the simplest answer as of now. I think you want to believe too much there agent mulder.

My question to you is ok, so aliens manipulated genetic code over millions and millions of years to give us the much needed boosts in evolution. What gave those aliens that boost? Other aliens? Do you see where I am going with this?

The evolutionary process is never a jump. Never. An organism gets to the point that it has changed so much that it cannot reproduce with the general population of its species. The only way they can reproduce, is by incest. And if it works out and they live longer, than they will have a lot of little incestuous babies that also have those traits. Incest is a huge part of evolution. Even though it's not cool with us civilized humans, incest is how evolution works. How you get from one species to another...

 

[RWS]

The only time there may have been a "jump", or a "hump jump", is from homo-erectus to homo-sapien.

The Sumerians said that their masters, the Anunnaki, created them by mingling their essence with that of the ape-man...

They recorded this 6000 years ago. The actual creation took place about 200,000 years before. So, again, this argument works very well for me to answer the silly religions that came from it, and the wildly different ideas about "god".

 

[sakinago]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

if this is yet another proselytizing thread, it probably belongs in the myriad of discussions in the religion section where people who believe certain things try to pretend they can convince people who do not believe in those things and have not asked to be preached to, that they *should* believe in those things.

all the while, substituting "faith" which has no evidence, for fact.

it's not that i don't respect your belief. t's that everyone believes they are correct in their beliefs or lack thereof.

hence the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong has at its foundation an arrogance that is truly off-putting to anyone but those who share your belief set.

You do not know my belief set. I believe in evolution if your hinting that I believe in creationism. So why this reaction to 3 very big and still mysterious leaps in evolution, that evolutionary biologists debate all the time?

And no this does not belong under religion and ethics, it belongs under science!! That is what it is, stop dismissing what you don't like as religion, your as worse than 5000 year old earth people.

First: DNA is a chemical. It can be broken down to its individual atoms. Given enough chance, those atoms will assemble in the proper combination in a primitive form, and the molecule will begin to self-replicate. Given the almost infinite chances of it happening, it's almost a certainty to happen. And in multiple ways. There are life forms on this planet that did not come from our "genesis".

Second: There was no "jump". You're just failing to see the evolutionary increments that led to that development. Change happens so slowly that it is not noticeable until a species can't reproduce with its prior species, and has to mate with its brothers and sisters, or Mom and Dad. Incest is a huge part of how evolution works...

"Finally": Are you serious?

You are correct, DNA is matter, therefore it's made up of atoms, thank you. It is however much more complicated than DNA just happened to form up. DNA does not self replicate on its own, it needed the hardware, available chemicles, energy, a way to harness that energy, and not to mention some sort of barrier to house all of the chemicals. Which leads to the first question I posed.

And so you are claiming that the dinosaurs just slowly evolved into us? There was no cataclysm that lead to the dominance of mammals as the apex species in most environments? So prokaryotic and arkeaic bacteria just slowly became more complex over time? That the difference between dolphin and almost every other animal intelligence is not as great as the difference between dolphin and human intelligence?

 

[sakinago]

The only time there may have been a "jump", or a "hump jump", is from homo-erectus to homo-sapien.

The Sumerians said that their masters, the Anunnaki, created them by mingling their essence with that of the ape-man...

They recorded this 6000 years ago. The actual creation took place about 200,000 years before. So, again, this argument works very well for me to answer the silly religions that came from it, and the wildly different ideas about "god".

Again what gave those aliens the intelligence boost to be able to fly across the galaxy and manipulate apes into humans? Other aliens. Or did it happen naturally for them? Why couldn't it have happened naturally for us? Why are we no longer slaves to our alien creators?

 

[sakinago]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

if this is yet another proselytizing thread, it probably belongs in the myriad of discussions in the religion section where people who believe certain things try to pretend they can convince people who do not believe in those things and have not asked to be preached to, that they *should* believe in those things.

all the while, substituting "faith" which has no evidence, for fact.

it's not that i don't respect your belief. t's that everyone believes they are correct in their beliefs or lack thereof.

hence the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong has at its foundation an arrogance that is truly off-putting to anyone but those who share your belief set.

You do not know my belief set. I believe in evolution if your hinting that I believe in creationism. So why this reaction to 3 very big and still mysterious leaps in evolution, that evolutionary biologists debate all the time?

And no this does not belong under religion and ethics, it belongs under science!! That is what it is, stop dismissing what you don't like as religion, your as worse than 5000 year old earth people.

if you are not a creationist, then why these questions? you should understand that we have a lot of knowledge and don't yet have scientific evidence as to that period immediately preceding the big bang.

so again, i'm not sure why you open the floor to the usual "your belief in science is faith just like religion" nonsense.

I never said that "science is just like faith" argument!!! These are the biggest questions in evoloutionary biology, that biologist discuss all the time!! I enjoy discussing it, I'm sorry if you don't like the questions because they are not in a simplified form of high school biology, and that it requires more critical thinking. Pysicist don't have all the answers for dark energy, it's a huge mystery, that doesn't mean not to discuss it, does it? If you want to stick to the cliff notes version of evolution because it's easier for you, be my guest, I don't care, just don't try to use an ad hominem on me so that you don't have to critically think about it.

 

[Fishlore]

It takes time for new understandings about time and space to trickle down to a field like psychology. No sooner had Einstein rewritten our understanding of space and gravity than quantum mechanics discovered that it is possible for two things to be in synchronization across space with no connective energy or medium. We see that this is so but we still don't understand how.

We still conceptualize intelligence within the boundaries of the narrative ego. We think that reasoning must by an electro-chemical process within the organ of each individual brain. We know that this limitation is not as absolute as we once thought; in fact, we are already deigning computers empowered by newly discovered properties of quantum mechanics.

We now analogize our brains as computers. Perhaps when we succeed in a quantum computer we will be able to understand that the intelligence of a species is not constrained by anatomical limitations.

 

[sakinago]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

if this is yet another proselytizing thread, it probably belongs in the myriad of discussions in the religion section where people who believe certain things try to pretend they can convince people who do not believe in those things and have not asked to be preached to, that they *should* believe in those things.

all the while, substituting "faith" which has no evidence, for fact.

it's not that i don't respect your belief. t's that everyone believes they are correct in their beliefs or lack thereof.

hence the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong has at its foundation an arrogance that is truly off-putting to anyone but those who share your belief set.

You do not know my belief set. I believe in evolution if your hinting that I believe in creationism. So why this reaction to 3 very big and still mysterious leaps in evolution, that evolutionary biologists debate all the time?

And no this does not belong under religion and ethics, it belongs under science!! That is what it is, stop dismissing what you don't like as religion, your as worse than 5000 year old earth people.

if you are not a creationist, then why these questions? you should understand that we have a lot of knowledge and don't yet have scientific evidence as to that period immediately preceding the big bang.

so again, i'm not sure why you open the floor to the usual "your belief in science is faith just like religion" nonsense.

This would be like me calling a physicist a Scientologist for saying that "we cannot account for even half of the energy in the universe, therefore there must be some form of dark energy." And then me saying "you scientologist will bring up anything to fit the writings of Elron Hubbard." It's ridiculous! I did not think up these questions, eveloutionary biologist did! Why don't you go call them creationist. Ugh, where is the emoji for shooting yourself in the head.

 

[sealybobo]

The only time there may have been a "jump", or a "hump jump", is from homo-erectus to homo-sapien.

The Sumerians said that their masters, the Anunnaki, created them by mingling their essence with that of the ape-man...

They recorded this 6000 years ago. The actual creation took place about 200,000 years before. So, again, this argument works very well for me to answer the silly religions that came from it, and the wildly different ideas about "god".

Again what gave those aliens the intelligence boost to be able to fly across the galaxy and manipulate apes into humans? Other aliens. Or did it happen naturally for them? Why couldn't it have happened naturally for us? Why are we no longer slaves to our alien creators?

Maybe we are. Rockafellor JP Morgan Ford koch Soros Romney are all aliens

 

[Never3ndr]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

 

[MarathonMike]

Those questions always remind me of the cartoon where a professor has filled a blackboard with equations for a mathematical proof. There in the middle of all the equations, he writes "Then a miracle happens and thus we clearly see that...."

 

[sealybobo]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

if this is yet another proselytizing thread, it probably belongs in the myriad of discussions in the religion section where people who believe certain things try to pretend they can convince people who do not believe in those things and have not asked to be preached to, that they *should* believe in those things.

all the while, substituting "faith" which has no evidence, for fact.

it's not that i don't respect your belief. t's that everyone believes they are correct in their beliefs or lack thereof.

hence the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong has at its foundation an arrogance that is truly off-putting to anyone but those who share your belief set.

You do not know my belief set. I believe in evolution if your hinting that I believe in creationism. So why this reaction to 3 very big and still mysterious leaps in evolution, that evolutionary biologists debate all the time?

And no this does not belong under religion and ethics, it belongs under science!! That is what it is, stop dismissing what you don't like as religion, your as worse than 5000 year old earth people.

if you are not a creationist, then why these questions? you should understand that we have a lot of knowledge and don't yet have scientific evidence as to that period immediately preceding the big bang.

so again, i'm not sure why you open the floor to the usual "your belief in science is faith just like religion" nonsense.

We are all in search of the truth. I visited a mosque synagog temple and church and all I found were fables. Then I heard everything we know so far and if what we know is true, it contradicts what religions have told us.

And if logic and facts matter, all religions must be made up. You would have to believe in the supernatural magic spirit world. Angels ghosts demons and gods.

You would have to believe God poofed us into existence. I simply can not believe that.

So knowing all that and the fact that a God is not necessary, I doubt there is one. And I'm so sure he'll won't even convince me. Neither will guilt. Only logic and facts will convince me. They can say I have faith because I do. Faith they are fos. Wishful unevolved thinking.

We are still a primitive species. 75% or more of us are stuck in the stone age

 

[sealybobo]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

It's what the evidence suggests. Do you have contradictory evidence

 

[D Truth]

I get this might not necassarily belong in CDZ, but since I can't stand any of the other forums, this is where I'm posting it. I hope that this becomes a fun conversation

First question: How did chemicals from lifeless reactions, turn into life?

Second: How did the early simple, single cell prokaryotic forms of life that had reached their available energy threshold, jumped to a higher energy threshold and turn into a eukaryotic form. A much more complex cell, that becomes the building block for complex life.

Finally: How did the jump happen from standard animal intelligence to human consciousness? Sure there are some smart animals out there, but they do not hold a candle to human intelligence.

Who the hell knows, certainly not human beings... correct that, protein synthesis, "life" has already been proven in lab conditions
Scientists Discover New Mechanism of Protein Synthesis | Biology | Sci-News.com

“This surprising discovery reflects how incomplete our understanding of biology is. Nature is capable of more than we realize,”

.

 

[Iceweasel]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

I said it several times already, I cannot understand it for you. We don't have "evidence" that life, or the universe for that matter, simply jump started itself into existence. You are demonstrating a high level of faith to believe so. No evidence, no facts but a firm belief = faith. How many times does it need to be explained to you?

 

[Iceweasel]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

It's what the evidence suggests. Do you have contradictory evidence

Contradictory evidence to evidence that doesn't exist? Instead of bluffing you could have posted said evidence. Go ahead, I'll be back.

 

[sealybobo]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

I said it several times already, I cannot understand it for you. We don't have "evidence" that life, or the universe for that matter, simply jump started itself into existence. You are demonstrating a high level of faith to believe so. No evidence, no facts but a firm belief = faith. How many times does it need to be explained to you?

What do you believe? The answer should be you don't know

 

[Iceweasel]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

I said it several times already, I cannot understand it for you. We don't have "evidence" that life, or the universe for that matter, simply jump started itself into existence. You are demonstrating a high level of faith to believe so. No evidence, no facts but a firm belief = faith. How many times does it need to be explained to you?

What do you believe? The answer should be you don't know

So you couldn't post any of the evidence that you posited? Now it's about me? LOL.

 

[sealybobo]

As far as your OP, I've already given my answer...random chance. Attempting to assign reason or meaning when we currently have no evidence to support such theories may be popular (I mean Zeus worked for explaining and giving reason to lightening for hundreds of years) but that doesn't make it any more true.

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

I said it several times already, I cannot understand it for you. We don't have "evidence" that life, or the universe for that matter, simply jump started itself into existence. You are demonstrating a high level of faith to believe so. No evidence, no facts but a firm belief = faith. How many times does it need to be explained to you?

What do you believe? The answer should be you don't know

So you couldn't post any of the evidence that you posited? Now it's about me? LOL.

Yes it's now on you! We admit we don't know. Do you know?

 

[Iceweasel]

...which requires a HIGH degree of faith. Too much for most folks. You are a deeply faithful believer indeed. Dismissing other faiths doesn't change it.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something...explain how, given our current evidence and knowledge base...that this is deeply faithful. Perhaps I am a devout believer. Perhaps I lack all of the facts. Please, provide reasoning for your argument instead of just stating your conclusion. Where, specifically, am I being faithful and believing where there is no evidence?

I said it several times already, I cannot understand it for you. We don't have "evidence" that life, or the universe for that matter, simply jump started itself into existence. You are demonstrating a high level of faith to believe so. No evidence, no facts but a firm belief = faith. How many times does it need to be explained to you?

What do you believe? The answer should be you don't know

So you couldn't post any of the evidence that you posited? Now it's about me? LOL.

Yes it's now on you! We admit we don't know. Do you know?

No, you didn't admit you don't know you said the opposite. I said all along I believe in a creator because I can't buy random chance creating everything but don't know any more about him/it. The words are still there, they didn't evolve into something else while sitting on a server somewhere.