Life on other Planets?

Come on guy. What does any of that have to do with the topic? In case you forgot, we are talking about "Life on other Planets?".Your belief in some designer or deity is irrelevant, unimportant.Your definition of chaos is irrelevant, unimportant.Life on other Planets?Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

As we can NOT conclude that BY VIRTUE OF water having the same properties in space as on our planet, and that chemicals having the same behavior on other planets as on earth (note: nor can we also conclude that all chemicals have the same behavior on other planets as they do on Earth) abiogenesis will inevitably happen, HENCE it is thoroughly inappropriate to say that "hence abiogenesis will inevitably happen."

I'm sorry but why can we not conclude that "all chemicals have the same behavior on other planets as they do on Earth" since ALL of the evidence shows that they do?And in addition, who is saying that abiogenesis will inevitably happen?So far it looks like all you have are attempts to change the subject and misrepresenting what folk say as usual.You do understand that there are means of remote testing for things like chemistry, nuclear reactions, physical properties, even things like amino acids and that so far every such test has shown that chemistry and physics are about the same everywhere?If things behave the same what reason is there to think things will not behave the same?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Good question, I am glad you asked.It is simply a matter of editorial comment and response that it is perhaps informationally of interest that evolutionists overwhelmingly (overwhelmingly being used in the sense of virtually without exception) believe in the existence of something for which they have zero empirical evidence, while at the same time selectively proclaiming opposition to belief in things for which one does not have empirical evidence.Aliens in space, vibrating strings of infinite size, worm holes, alternative dimensions of existence------YesAn intelligent force behind observable ordered phenomenon-----No.Just interesting, that's all.

Again, so far no one but you has mentioned any of those things and so it is just another attempt by you to change teh subject.Life on other Planets?That is the topic in case you forgot.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

While your delusions are somewhat interesting to those of us who are interested in the psychology of being wrong, they aren't really on topic, are they?

Well we have seen inteligent life form on Erth and so fare there is no evidence that Inteligente life Could not have formed on some other planet. Well the the math suports it though i do not understand the theory too well Just look at an apple ynd you will find one Worm holes are still verry hypothetical as fare as i know. I do not understand that one either thoug they say they have something to go on, Tough you would also haveto belive in this if you want to have your heven and hell. Well because you provide such silly arguments that cannot be supported. I see order so there must be a desighner Wtf. I do not see order so there is no desighner LOL. You would haveto acount to why one would NEED a desighner for ORDER why could it not just become order like it usualy does. Pour a drop of ink in to the glass at first it is verry disorderly, wait a while and all the water turns blue the colored molecules arange themselves in an orderly fasion and no one told them to.Just interesting, that's all. Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Maybe they do and maybe they don't. Certainly the responses in this thread are not statements of unquestioning, blind faith; but rather highly qualified and universally marked by a reticence to take a position supported by no evidence.I mean, we're not dumb, Bolder. Everybody knew what you were going to do as soon as you opened the thread. Here's a representative sample of the replies:

quote:

---

Probably

---

quote:

---

I don't know.

---

quote:

---

Life on other planets is probable, but there is little evidence either way. I'll wait until there is.

---

quote:

---

I would need more data.

---

quote:

---

No.

---

quote:

---

Whether or not there is life elsewhere in the universe is something that may never be known for sure

---

quote:

---

... witouth evidence [of] actual life found there i cant give a clear yes.

---

quote:

---

No evidence to make that claim

---

quote:

---

I don't have physical verifiable reproducible evidence to support such a statement.

---

Just to be clear, these are the replies from which you're concluding that evolutionists "overwhelmingly, as in virtually without exception" have absolute blind faith in the existence of extraterrestrial life.Fess up, Bolder. You were going to accuse us of having blind faith anyway, no matter what we wrote. Weren't you? As for "blind faith" - if the statements I quoted had been made in the context of belief in God, I think you would have accused each and every utterer as being an atheist or at least an agnostic. Nobody would construe "I would need more data", for instance, as a profession of unquestioning faith in God.The only thing that makes you look stupider than trying to set up a really obvious trap is when your quarry spots the trap and you try to spring it anyway. You didn't even read our replies, did you? You just assumed that we were all Star Trek nerds who would "overwhelmingly, virtually without any exception" have utter confidence in life on other planets.Man, you truly are a moron.

Thanks for the link. 4.
(initial capital letter) the personification of this in any of several ancient Greek myths.
5.
Obsolete. a chasm or abyss.

​

The behavior of systems that follow deterministic laws but appear random and unpredictable. Chaotic systems very are sensitive to initial conditions; small changes in those conditions can lead to quite different outcomes. One example of chaotic behavior is the flow of air in conditions of turbulence.

​

A new branch of science that deals with systems whose evolution depends very sensitively upon the initial conditions. Turbulent flows of fluids (such as white water in a river) and the prediction of the weather are two areas where chaos theory has been applied with some success.

​

A property of some non-linear dynamic systems which exhibit sensitive dependence on initial conditions. This means that there are initial states which evolve within some finite time to states whose separation in one or more dimensions of state space depends, in an average sense, exponentially on their initial separation. You intentionally didn't list the other meanings as that would have undermined your point.
If you have to lie to make a point, then that point is invalid. Which makes it easy for everyone as words only have one meaning.
Oh no, they don't - but at least we can read your mind to find out which meaning you are using.
Oh no, we can't - but at least we can use the context to identify which meaning you are using.
Oh no, we can't - as you use which ever meaning you feel like, regardless of the context. I addressed all of the points you raised in your original message, but you think you can ignore my replies and start asking more facile questions.
If you do not have the decency to address my responses then you are again being intentionally dishonest when debating.If only Christianity had some requirement for honesty or maybe some kind of moral guide.
But it would seem not, judging by your behaviour.

You are assuming a fact not in evidence. When the science side says that there is a possibility, probability or any other similar statement, that doesn't mean blind acceptance. It is simply that we don't totally reject the concept.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

To clarify, I mean that chemicals will have the same behaviour in the same conditions whether those conditions exist on earth or on other planets.It seems reasonable to assume that earth-like conditions exist on other planets. Therefore, since we know that life began by abiogenesis on earth (whether it was helped along by some intelligent entity or not), it seems reasonable to conclude that the same process occured on other planets too (whether it was helped along by some intelligent entity or not).

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

It's also psychology that keeps people in the casino. Gambling is a variable ratio reinforcement schedule with immediate feedback.This schedule is perfect to create a high steady response rate and is responsible for the addictivity (is that a word? it is, now) of gambling in general.

Yeah, maybe on Mars selenium is a halide.Ah ... creationism.

I figured he was playing some kind of 'gotcha!' game right from the start.Do I win 5?

Hi, Dash. Are you familiar with the concept of establishing precedent?If little Johnny doesn't get in trouble for taking a cookie, then little Timmy is going to think it's okay for him to take a cookie too.If a court case uses a particular argument, and the argument is allowed by the court, future cases are also going to allow the same argument to be used in other cases.As far as life is concerned, an observation that life exists here establishes the precedent that life at least can exist. When we add the evidence that much of the chemistry required for life has been found in places other than Earth, it makes the speculation that life exists plausible or reasonable.As far as God is concerned, no precedent has been established, and no evidence has been given other than your assertion that order correlates with intelligence (which has been rebutted effectively by Crashfrog).To me, the likelihood of life outside of Earth outweighs the alternative based on simple reason, no matter what the premises are:If life emerges naturally when the required conditions are met, then I just observe how big the universe is and conclude that the likelihood that the required conditions are met somewhere else seems pretty high. Thus, I say, "I believe there is life elsewhere in the universe."Or, if life is designed by a supernatural intelligent entity, then it seems strange for that entity to not use its space, unless, of course, it wanted us to grow and use all that space, in which case I'm pretty sure there were more effective ways to allow us to do it. Thus, I say, "I believe there is life elsewhere in the universe."Believing things based on probabilities is not particularly scientific, but there are things for which I don't have the scientific credentials to address properly, nor the time for rigorous study on which to base scientific conclusions, and which I don't think are particularly important that I be right about, so I don't see much of a point in bothering to be scientific about it.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.