Humans May Be the Only Intelligent Life in the Universe, If Evolution Has Anything to Say.

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, tell me where NASA is going to send humans next? Are they going to stay for over a week? Nope.

I believe the Moon is next. Then Mars.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We may be utterly alone in the universe.

Humans May Be the Only Intelligent Life in the Universe, If Evolution Has Anything to Say

We may be utterly alone in the universe.

www.livescience.com

One of the stupidest articles ever written by an evolved monkey

 

[CrusaderFrank]

To support life, a planet must maintain a certain temperature range, have water and a somewhat stable climate

Those planets are few and far between

Most planets with life are more likely to have some sort of slime than intelligent life

There's life on Europa

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Unfortunately statistics doesn't produce life.

Life was created by a series of events that are so complicated that we can't replicate them in a laboratory.

We are biased because we live where life was created so of course we think it is a common occurrence. However, it may be that it has never happened before.

This video explains it much better than I could.

Don't believe a word of it

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"Life was created by a series of events that are so complicated that we can't replicate them in a laboratory."

So what? We can't create stars or volcanos in a laboratory, either.

Nobody is asking, "Can we create life in a labratory?"

We are asking if it has evolved at least twice in the 13.7 billion tears history of the universe.

 

[rightwinger]

Well, tell me where NASA is going to send humans next? Are they going to stay for over a week? Nope.

Do foreign planets have the same Bible we do?

 

[james bond]

I believe the Moon is next. Then Mars.

I was right < 7 days -- NASA scientists reveal how long astronauts will stay on the Moon for Artemis mission.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I was right < 7 days -- NASA scientists reveal how long astronauts will stay on the Moon for Artemis mission.

Yes, just a visit.

 

[Seymour Flops]

^ Are we alone in the universe? It comes down to whether intelligence is a probable outcome of natural selection, or an improbable fluke. By definition, probable events occur frequently, improbable events occur rarely — or once. Our evolutionary history shows that many key adaptations — not just intelligence, but complex animals, complex cells, photosynthesis, and life itself — were unique, one-off events, and therefore highly improbable. Our evolution may have been like winning the lottery … only far less likely.

Like many thought experiments regarding evolution, this one starts in the middle, and not at the beginning.

The beginning of the process of evolution into intelligent life, say intelligent enough to create space vessels capable of travelling to other planets, is the formation of living matter from non-living matter.

If life began, there must have been a lifeless condition in the universe that preceded it. The evolution from the lifeless matter that was all that existed to living organisms capable of reproducing with gradual changes is a far greater leap than the evolution from early proto-humans to space travelers.

So great is that leap that there is no plausible explanation for it presented by purely naturalistic science, and non-naturalist explanations simply propose a powerful intelligent creator of life with no explanation of how that creator came to exist. That process - abiogenesis - is so logically unlikely that the only reason it has near universal acceptance it that it is hard to come up with an explanation for the existence of life that is not even more outlandish.

So, the question is not whether there are planets that could sustain life, but whether there are planets whose conditions bring about the creation of life. Those conditions - whatever they are - may be so rare that it is a fluke that it happened even just this once, or so common that we will find life on many of the planets who conditions are remotely similar to Earth.

 

[Flash]

Don't believe a word of it

Did you watch the whole video?

What don't you believe?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Life was created by a series of events that are so complicated that we can't replicate them in a laboratory."

So what? We can't create stars or volcanos in a laboratory, either.

Nobody is asking, "Can we create life in a labratory?"

We are asking if it has evolved at least twice in the 13.7 billion tears history of the universe.

By evolution, probably not. That makes you one of the smartest beings - in the Whole Universe!

Go have your hot cocoa.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

By evolution, probably not.

Let's clarify this.

"Evolution" is what happens after life is already formed. But I get your point.

You mean, abiogenesis. And to be even more clear, you mean abiogenesis arising merely from selection and chemicals.

So you say abiogenesis has to be magical. Gotta grab some dirt and make a man? Like that?

Or... what?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Did you watch the whole video?

What don't you believe?

I don't believe Evolution. At all.

The odds of simply randomly shuffling a deck of 52 cards the same way twice is physically impossible. Evolution supposes that not 52, but thousands of random molecules randomly formed thousands of proteins to randomly form the first cells which have since randomly evolved to make Fort Fun Indiana one of the most intelligent being in the whole Universe. It's not a dig at Fort, it's just reminding you that you might not have this right

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The odds of simply randomly shuffling a deck of 52 cards the same way twice is physically impossible.

Did you know that there is a name for this fallacy? Like, you aren't the first one to come up with it... and it was explained away long ago?

Has it crossed your mind to go look it up and learn about it?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Let's clarify this.

"Evolution" is what happens after life is already formed. But I get your point.

You mean, abiogenesis. And to be even more clear, you mean abiogenesis arising merely from selection and chemicals.

So you say abiogenesis has to be magical. Gotta grab some dirt and make a man? Like that?

Or... what?

It's literally beyond me as a logical person. The only thing that makes sense goes back to Castaneda's Don Juan describing the Universe as comprised of: the Known, the Unknown and the Unknowable. The first is what our senses tell us is so, the second is the incremental extra that we're physically capable of understanding and there's the 99% of the Universe that is the Unknowable; humans lack the capacity to engage with it.

It's a creation that we're all part of.

We're only now at the point where computers AI are starting to sound self aware. Can you imagine another 100 years of technology advancement, including the AI self correcting?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's literally beyond me as a logical person.

No, it isn't! Trying to think of the whole of it will render you a drooling idiot, but that goes for anything with huge numbers and complex physics and chemistry at work.

So, you break it down to looking at how smaller structures formed. Even pre-life. Like, cell membranes. In the most basic form, they are stacks of lipids with a hydrophilic end and a hydrophilic end.

These lipids bump into one another and stick together. The structure may curve, depending on the lipids and how they bond. In that case, a "bubble" of this lipid membrane would be formed. And voila, a primeval cell membrane prototype is formed.

 

[Flash]

I don't believe Evolution. At all.

The odds of simply randomly shuffling a deck of 52 cards the same way twice is physically impossible. Evolution supposes that not 52, but thousands of random molecules randomly formed thousands of proteins to randomly form the first cells which have since randomly evolved to make Fort Fun Indiana one of the most intelligent being in the whole Universe. It's not a dig at Fort, it's just reminding you that you might not have this right

I am a Christian that believes that God created the heavens and earth.

However, I believe that it was done through orderly science that included evolution.

What is in the video is very reasonable. We may be alone in the universe. If the universe is finite then there will be unique things in it. Life on earth may be unique.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No, it isn't! Trying to think of the whole of it will render you a drooling idiot, but that goes for anything with huge numbers and complex physics and chemistry at work.

So, you break it down to looking at how smaller structures formed. Even pre-life. Like, cell membranes. In the most basic form, they are stacks of lipids with a hydrophilic end and a hydrophilic end.

These lipids bump into one another and stick together. The structure may curve, depending on the lipids and how they bond. In that case, a "bubble" of this lipid membrane would be formed. And voila, a primeval cell membrane prototype is formed.

You need to take that further. It's not just one time lump of a membrane, you need ALL of the basic functions to "evolve" perfectly together AND have an ability to replicate.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If the universe is finite then there will be unique things in it. Life on earth may be unique.

Indeed. But that could mean a different type of life elsewhere, no? It's pretty hard to define life.

Also hard to imagine: life only formed once -- not zero times, not more than one time , but EXACTLY once -- in the long history of the huge universe. While there are unique objects in the universe, no doubt (hell, each human is unique), the formation of life seems more like is just something that will happen, if it can. Like mountains, or formation of planets, or lakes and rivers. Moons, and stars.

Life didn't form in spite of its environment. It's environment was Earth, not the universe. It formed BECAUSE of its environment. And once it did form, that was it. Life is and will be on and in Earth, until Earth is destroyed, uninterrupted. And it may hitch a ride and exist after that.

We can look at our own galaxy and find star systems similar to ours. Stars follow patterns. The material around them follows patterns. If we can find billions and billions of stars like our own in just our galaxy, it rightfully renders our system a bit less unique. I.E., more commonality. Like a first cousin vs. a complete stranger from the other side of the world. Still strictly unique, but more similar than otherwise.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You need to take that further. It's not just one time lump of a membrane, you need ALL of the basic functions to "evolve" perfectly together AND have an ability to replicate.

No, see, that's where you stray from the path. They didn't evolve "perfectly". The systems may have evolved other ways. And did, when you look at two animals. Which is perfect? The bladder lung of a Gar, or the lungs of a lungfish?

The system isn't "perfect", it just works. If it did not, it would not persist. There were many more failed models than successful ones. But we don't see those, because they failed.

Replication is not really a mystery at all. A hydrocarbon splits, the two pieces map a version of the missing piece onto itself from available materials, and you have replication. Very easy to replicate in the lab (for the experts, not for me). Then, a more complex organic molecule does the same. Keep scaling it up it up with longer molecules, and you eventually get DNA replication.

You say things like the quote above... your first instinct should be to wonder if the people who have dedicated their lives to studying of this, oh just maybe, thought of that. A while ago. Then look up what they have to say.