There is No Home in the Universe but Earth

[Blues Man]

abiogenesis is just as viable a theory as the god theory

Abiogenesis isn't even a theory. It's a fact. The Theory of Abiogensis, which attempts to explain how abiogenesis works, is a theory. Similarly, star formation is a fact, and the Theory of Star Formation attempts to explain how star formation works.

Abiogenesis remains scientifically unproven. That doesn't mean it didn't happen it just means we can't explain it.

 

[Flash]

Abiogenesis remains scientifically unproven. That doesn't mean it didn't happen it just means we can't explain it.

This is one thing that is very perplexing.

It is not easy for life to be created. Our scientists have been doing research on it for many decades and can't turn chemistry into biology.

That means it takes a very complex process to produce life. Of course we all would surmise that the more complex it is the less likely chance of it happening elsewhere.

It takes a lot more than water, a Golidlocks zone and bolt of lightning to produce life.

 

[Blues Man]

Abiogenesis remains scientifically unproven. That doesn't mean it didn't happen it just means we can't explain it.

This is one thing we that is very perplexing.

It is not easy for life to be created. Our scientists have been doing research on it for many decades and can't turn chemistry into biology.

That means it takes a very complex process to produce life. Of course we all would surmise that the more complex it is the less likely chance of it happening elsewhere.

It takes a lot more than water, a Golidlocks zone and bolt of lightning to produce life.

Exactly my point. Theory is mostly supposition.

 

[danielpalos]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

 

[Sunsettommy]

We’re either alone or we’re not.

Both ideas are equally disturbing.

I dont believe we are alone at all, but EVERY planet we encounter seems to be a nightmarish world where no living thing can survive

Those are only the ones in our solar system. There’s billions of planets out there.

Says who?

Astronomers have found around 2,800 Planets using the Kepler Telescope.

I have seen ALL of the Solar system planets with my Telescopes over the years, but never see anymore than that as my two biggest scopes are the 25" F5 and the Current 18" F 4.5 scope.

 

[ChemEngineer]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

You Christophobes pose questions such as this and then deny, refute and run from the answers, always. Your unscientific bias is irrational and widespread.

The human body alone has many thousands of proteins, precise combinations of amino acid residues joined by peptide bonds. Short proteins are hundreds of amino acid residues in length. Titin is 33,450 in length.

What is 1/20 to the 33,450th power?

Let me give you some perspective to exponents. There are ~10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe. "Impossible" can be defined as 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power. Ten to the fiftieth power grains of sand would fill several spheres the size of our solar system out to Pluto. Imagine a space explorer diving into one of the five or ten solar system sized spheres to find one single specially marked grain of sand on his first and only try. It's not an infinite number over 10 to the 50. It's 1.
That's it.

That's statistical impossibility by any common sense measure, not that biased people like you would ever admit it.

 

[Hollie]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

You Christophobes pose questions such as this and then deny, refute and run from the answers, always. Your unscientific bias is irrational and widespread.

The human body alone has many thousands of proteins, precise combinations of amino acid residues joined by peptide bonds. Short proteins are hundreds of amino acid residues in length. Titin is 33,450 in length.

What is 1/20 to the 33,450th power?

Let me give you some perspective to exponents. There are ~10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe. "Impossible" can be defined as 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power. Ten to the fiftieth power grains of sand would fill several spheres the size of our solar system out to Pluto. Imagine a space explorer diving into one of the five or ten solar system sized spheres to find one single specially marked grain of sand on his first and only try. It's not an infinite number over 10 to the 50. It's 1.
That's it.

That's statistical impossibility by any common sense measure, not that biased people like you would ever admit it.

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Says who?

Astronomers have found around 2,800 Planets using the Kepler Telescope.

I have seen ALL of the Solar system planets with my Telescopes over the years, but never see anymore than that as my two biggest scopes are the 25" F5 and the Current 18" F 4.5 scope

No planet outside the solar system has ever been SEEN.

I'm not saying they dont exist, but nobody had ever seen one.

But the "fact" they exist is irrelevant to the statement that THERE IS NO HOME IN THE UNIVERSE FOR MAN BUT THE EARTH

 

[Flash]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

You Christophobes pose questions such as this and then deny, refute and run from the answers, always. Your unscientific bias is irrational and widespread.

The human body alone has many thousands of proteins, precise combinations of amino acid residues joined by peptide bonds. Short proteins are hundreds of amino acid residues in length. Titin is 33,450 in length.

What is 1/20 to the 33,450th power?

Let me give you some perspective to exponents. There are ~10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe. "Impossible" can be defined as 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power. Ten to the fiftieth power grains of sand would fill several spheres the size of our solar system out to Pluto. Imagine a space explorer diving into one of the five or ten solar system sized spheres to find one single specially marked grain of sand on his first and only try. It's not an infinite number over 10 to the 50. It's 1.
That's it.

That's statistical impossibility by any common sense measure, not that biased people like you would ever admit it.

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

You are falling into the trap that was illustrated by the prisoner analogy in the video I posted earlier.

Just because life exist on earth you think it must be common elsewhere where in fact it is the result of some highly improbable events that may or may be reproduced elsewhere.

 

[Hollie]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

You Christophobes pose questions such as this and then deny, refute and run from the answers, always. Your unscientific bias is irrational and widespread.

The human body alone has many thousands of proteins, precise combinations of amino acid residues joined by peptide bonds. Short proteins are hundreds of amino acid residues in length. Titin is 33,450 in length.

What is 1/20 to the 33,450th power?

Let me give you some perspective to exponents. There are ~10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe. "Impossible" can be defined as 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power. Ten to the fiftieth power grains of sand would fill several spheres the size of our solar system out to Pluto. Imagine a space explorer diving into one of the five or ten solar system sized spheres to find one single specially marked grain of sand on his first and only try. It's not an infinite number over 10 to the 50. It's 1.
That's it.

That's statistical impossibility by any common sense measure, not that biased people like you would ever admit it.

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

You are falling into the trap that was illustrated by the prisoner analogy in the video I posted earlier.

Just because life exist on earth you think it must be common elsewhere where in fact it is the result of some highly improbable events that may or may be reproduced elsewhere.

You're not understanding what I wrote. My comments didn't address whether or not life my be common elsewhere in the universe. My comments addressed the nonsensical ''the odds are too great'', comments from the science illiterate religious extremist.

 

[Flash]

However, there are lots of people that are absolutely convinced life exist elsewhere because they speculate on invalid statistical probabilities and that is unscientific.

What invalid statistical probabilities?

You Christophobes pose questions such as this and then deny, refute and run from the answers, always. Your unscientific bias is irrational and widespread.

The human body alone has many thousands of proteins, precise combinations of amino acid residues joined by peptide bonds. Short proteins are hundreds of amino acid residues in length. Titin is 33,450 in length.

What is 1/20 to the 33,450th power?

Let me give you some perspective to exponents. There are ~10 to the 80th fundamental particles in the universe. "Impossible" can be defined as 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power. Ten to the fiftieth power grains of sand would fill several spheres the size of our solar system out to Pluto. Imagine a space explorer diving into one of the five or ten solar system sized spheres to find one single specially marked grain of sand on his first and only try. It's not an infinite number over 10 to the 50. It's 1.
That's it.

That's statistical impossibility by any common sense measure, not that biased people like you would ever admit it.

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

You are falling into the trap that was illustrated by the prisoner analogy in the video I posted earlier.

Just because life exist on earth you think it must be common elsewhere where in fact it is the result of some highly improbable events that may or may be reproduced elsewhere.

You're not understanding what I wrote. My comments didn't address whether or not life my be common elsewhere in the universe. My comments addressed the nonsensical ''the odds are too great'', comments from the science illiterate religious extremist.

Sorry if I misunderstood.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

I put you, Hollie, on Ignore months ago because you blather on and on without saying anything worth reading. You simply PRETEND to be sophisticated and intellectual without ever providing anything to substantiate your fatuous claims.

1. I posted science, not religious claims. You obviously don't know the difference between them.
2. Have you any IDEA of how difficult biochemical synthesis is? Any CLUE?
If so, tell the audience how you have that IDEA. I already introduced some solid facts and in response all you did was cry "hyper-religious." No, it's biochemistry. It's statistics. Get a clue.
3. My dear friend is a chemistry professor and he agrees emphatically with my statement of 10^-50 being impossible.
4. Atheist Richard Dawkins states that 10^-40 is impossible. He grants ten orders of magnitude to my definition, but you pretend to be smarter than your hero atheist Richard Dawkins.

Now IF you ever have some science to contribute, please do so. Otherwise spare the world your claims of scientific and statistical sophistication when you show precisely the opposite every time you tap your keys.

What is chirality and how does it impact the insuperable statistics of protein synthesis?
How does folding impact it?
What do you know about hemoglobin? Anything? Anything at all?

 

[Hollie]

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

I put you, Hollie, on Ignore months ago because you blather on and on without saying anything worth reading. You simply PRETEND to be sophisticated and intellectual without ever providing anything to substantiate your fatuous claims.

1. I posted science, not religious claims. You obviously don't know the difference between them.
2. Have you any IDEA of how difficult biochemical synthesis is? Any CLUE?
If so, tell the audience how you have that IDEA. I already introduced some solid facts and in response all you did was cry "hyper-religious." No, it's biochemistry. It's statistics. Get a clue.
3. My dear friend is a chemistry professor and he agrees emphatically with my statement of 10^-50 being impossible.
4. Atheist Richard Dawkins states that 10^-40 is impossible. He grants ten orders of magnitude to my definition, but you pretend to be smarter than your hero atheist Richard Dawkins.

Now IF you ever have some science to contribute, please do so. Otherwise spare the world your claims of scientific and statistical sophistication when you show precisely the opposite every time you tap your keys.

What is chirality and how does it impact the insuperable statistics of protein synthesis?
How does folding impact it?
What do you know about hemoglobin? Anything? Anything at all?

I understand. Your claim to put me on ignore is a fraudulent as your ''the odds are too great", nonsense. The problem shared by the hyper-religious is that their version of ''science'' amounts to cutting and pasting ''quotes'' they ''quote mine'' from ID'iot creationer websites.

Present the peer reviewed data and papers, works prepared by AIG for their biology research. You can't. We both know the charlatans at your ID'iot creationer ministries do no research and publish in no peer reviewed journals. Your clownish ''the odds are too great'' are just slogans with no support, right out of the Disco'tute. Why don't you tell us about chirality and how does it impact the insuperable statistics of protein synthesis? How does folding impact it? Tell us how any of the above precludes biological evolution. Obviously, you can't. You simply and mindlessly cut and paste ''quotes'' you read on fundie websites.

What you hyper-religious loons fail to realize is that your phony ''odds'' mean nothing because abiogenesis occurred, obviously, life exists and biological life evolves.

So, IF you have any evidence of a 6,000 year old planet, Arks cruising the seas, or anything to support your claims to polytheistic gods, godly miracles or supernatural events, present them.

Thanks. I'll be waiting to read your reference material and links to objective research on godly miracles and a flat earth.

 

[danielpalos]

You are falling into the trap that was illustrated by the prisoner analogy in the video I posted earlier.

Just because life exist on earth you think it must be common elsewhere where in fact it is the result of some highly improbable events that may or may be reproduced elsewhere.

The law of large numbers could claim that simply because there is (intelligent) life in one galaxy, there could be at least one in every galaxy.

 

[initforme]

This gets the award for ultimate troll thread....very well done.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

No, we don't have to accept that.

It's okay to admit that we don't know for sure. It's not sign of weakness, it's a sign of intellectual honesty.

Fir the first time in your miserable existence you did not troll and said something intelligent,

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Leave it to the hyper-religious to invent these phony, "the odds are too great, statistical impossibility... because I say so'', claims.

What is the probability of ''... because I say so'' 10^50?

I put you, Hollie, on Ignore months ago because you blather on and on without saying anything worth reading. You simply PRETEND to be sophisticated and intellectual without ever providing anything to substantiate your fatuous claims.

1. I posted science, not religious claims. You obviously don't know the difference between them.
2. Have you any IDEA of how difficult biochemical synthesis is? Any CLUE?
If so, tell the audience how you have that IDEA. I already introduced some solid facts and in response all you did was cry "hyper-religious." No, it's biochemistry. It's statistics. Get a clue.
3. My dear friend is a chemistry professor and he agrees emphatically with my statement of 10^-50 being impossible.
4. Atheist Richard Dawkins states that 10^-40 is impossible. He grants ten orders of magnitude to my definition, but you pretend to be smarter than your hero atheist Richard Dawkins.

Now IF you ever have some science to contribute, please do so. Otherwise spare the world your claims of scientific and statistical sophistication when you show precisely the opposite every time you tap your keys.

What is chirality and how does it impact the insuperable statistics of protein synthesis?
How does folding impact it?
What do you know about hemoglobin? Anything? Anything at all?

Hollie is a paid shill for Israel I put on ignore years ago.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

We’re either alone or we’re not.

Both ideas are equally disturbing.

I dont believe we are alone at all, but EVERY planet we encounter seems to be a nightmarish world where no living thing can survive

Those are only the ones in our solar system. There’s billions of planets out there.

Which is why it is absurd beyond reason to say we are the only planet with life forms.half of mankind is in denial mode like the op that there are alien life forms out there that hover in our sky’s observing us everyday with ships that are a thousand times more advanced than us able to easily leave our planet within a second or two. Man I sure hate being in agreement with two of our resident trolls.

 

[ChemEngineer]

This gets the award for ultimate troll thread....very well done.

Says the self-appointed Troll Thread Judge.

(Very well done by whom, precisely? You did not say.)

 

[LA RAM FAN]

We just need the Devil's Anus...
View attachment 471918
Looking to expand upon the work of Schwarszchild and other scientists seeking solutions to GR, they proposed the possible existence of "bridges" between two distant points in space time (known as "Einstein–Rosen bridges" or "wormholes") that could theoretically allow for matter and objects to pass between them.

Simple.
A few solar panels should do it.

You nailed it and aliens have mastered it.they are a 100 times more advanced than us,sure wish I could join them the way mankind is destroying this planet and always starting wars with each other,wish it was as easy as it is in the Star Wars universities when Luke was telling kenobi he did not mind selling the land speeder to pay fir the trip in the falcon saying that’s okay,I’m never coming back to this planet again. If ONLY it was that easy in real life to leave a planet for another one.