It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Odds of Life Occurring by Random Chance and The Odds of Sexual Reproduction and Genetics

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: intrptr

How about hundreds of billions, I can go higher

As impossible as it is, it's easier to believe than an all knowing creator did it, also there are no ramifications for our actions

Can lead a horse to water

Imo, life was brought here. Interstellar arks like johhnny appleseeds, terra forming ships filled with eggs, seeds and frozen embryos, a 'tree of life', whirling dervishes and stuff.


Yeah and that life evolved some time before the terra forming of earth on another planet
Prior to the Big Bang I guess

It all just goes downhill from adding on those extra 00s at the beginning
But it's science, it's a theory




posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Throw in the 2nd amendment , and everyone is screwed



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Stop adding the zeros, Eternity has no decimal place. The Universe goes on forever, it has always been there, life has had an eternity to spread pretty much everywhere.

Here we are.



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
Now all you have to explain is how that single protein learned how to divide itself. In the protein lifespan that is.


Ah, that’s the million dollar question: how did the protein replicate itself? We know we can’t make new proteins without DNA and we cannot make new DNA without proteins, so how did this happen? RNA is the answer! RNA can fold like a protein, catalyse reactions and also store information, without the need for proteins (although it cannot become as complex as a protein). This was discovered in 1982.

RNA is at the heart of ‘protein making factories’ and when this was confirmed in 2000 it also confirmed RNA came before proteins. Link

The next thing we need to confirm is if RNA can self replicate. Scientists have shown that sugars, bases and phosphates can naturally arise, and they were present in the primordial soup. LINK

In 2009 a scientist proved that when the primordial ingredients are present, things happen and his study showed that those ingredients generated spontaneously two nucleotides. RNA has four different nucleotides, so the job is not completely confirmed yet, but he’s halfway there to demonstrate RNA can self replicate. And from RNA we get protein and DNA. LINK

Like I said, some of us are not going to just sit and believe an alien or a bearded man in the sky made it all happen, some of us like to try to understand our incredible natural complexity. If we were created by aliens or a deity I’m sure we would have found some evidence and yet nothing. Science doesn’t have all the answers, but the answers it has are a lot better than just believing in the supernatural.



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Water flows downhill, life supposedly flows up
Sounds like your own argument let's you down
Funny that

a reply to: SprocketUK



Pass that joint along fella. It's obviously doing wonders.



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   
So let me go one step further in what I'm trying to get at when I'm questioning pure random chance as the root of all life as
we know it.

Carl Sagan on Science and Spirituality

“The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.”

"The friction between science and religion stretches from Galileo’s famous letter to today’s leading thinkers. And yet we’re seeing that, for all its capacity for ignorance, religion might have some valuable lessons for secular thought and the two need not be regarded as opposites."

"In 1996, mere months before his death, the great Carl Sagan — cosmic sage, voracious reader, hopeless romantic — explored the relationship between the scientific and the spiritual in The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (public library). He writes:

"Plainly there is no way back. Like it or not, we are stuck with science. We had better make the best of it. When we finally come to terms with it and fully recognize its beauty and its power, we will find, in spiritual as well as in practical matters, that we have made a bargain strongly in our favor."

"But superstition and pseudoscience keep getting in the way, distracting us, providing easy answers, dodging skeptical scrutiny, casually pressing our awe buttons and cheapening the experience, making us routine and comfortable practitioners as well as victims of credulity."

"And yet science, Sagan argues, isn’t diametrically opposed to spirituality. He echoes Ptolemy’s timeless awe at the cosmos and reflects on what Richard Dawkins has called the magic of reality, noting the intense spiritual elevation that science is capable of producing:.........."

See whole article here:
www.brainpickings.org...


So to sum up my position:

There is no evidence of a single creator backing life and existence - But science tells us there are endless patterns of
what is sometimes called intelligent design throughout all that exists, including life itself.

So one rational conclusion you could reach is that the universe and all that exists possesses an inherent intelligence to it
- We, and life itself, is a reflection of an intelligence we are yet to understand.

Or to put it as Carl Sagan did:

“We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos



So to answer my own question:

"The Odds of Life Occurring by Random Chance and The Odds of Sexual Reproduction and Genetics"

The odds are 100% - Our existence is inevitable, not a result of random chance;
Intelligence and destiny come with the Universe












edit on 17-7-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Agartha


Science doesn’t have all the answers, but the answers it has are a lot better than just believing in the supernatural.

Science is supernatural until its proven.

So will they realize when they found out the source of life. "Primordial soup?" By the way I made it clear I don't hold to religious beliefs that life poofed out of nowhere. I hold that it was brought here. Only because no-one can prove to me the Universe isn't already teeming with life long before we ever arrived.
edit on 17-7-2016 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Raggedyman

Stop adding the zeros, Eternity has no decimal place. The Universe goes on forever, it has always been there, life has had an eternity to spread pretty much everywhere.

Here we are.


And thats your opinion, science says there was a good chance a big bang, so that negates eternity, in this guise at least.
I dont believe life evolved, adding zeros is a science trick to fool people, I am being foolish



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Water flows downhill, life supposedly flows up
Sounds like your own argument let's you down
Funny that

a reply to: SprocketUK



Pass that joint along fella. It's obviously doing wonders.


Is that it, your scientific rebuttal, a cheap swipe about me being on drugs
Care to address the issue rather than trying to make me look like I compared the flow of water downhill to life evolving uphill.

We disagree, I get that, you are welcome to your silly beliefs, allow me the same
If you are going to throw your intellect around, you better get some...



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   
"We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos

And, the cosmos is a way for us to know ourselves". Me!
edit on 17-7-2016 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2016 @ 10:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
"We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos

And, the cosmos is a way for us to know ourselves". Me!


Quite true


You see there are those claiming that science allows for an independent review of a Universe with no meaning behind it
- They call that pure scientific observation - And what they fail to take into account is that there is no pure observation
of the Universe possible becuase we are part of the Universe - No intelligence possible unless you accept that the intelligence is built into the Universe - Intelligence and the Universe did not come from nothing - Nothing can not and
never did exist - And pure void lacking intelligence and meaning never existed.

What always existed before the Universe [if there was a before] was and is Mind - A mind whose nature is still, and may
always be more than we can comprehend.

So we do our best to add to and maybe in some ways try to control that mind

Theists like to believe that that mind is benign in nature - But the reality of biological history tells us this is not always true.

To date there is no evidence that the Universe is backed by a moral code - We set the code now
- We set the future Now





"SCIENCEFICTIONALISM the Way of the FUTURE"
universalspacealienpeoplesassociation.blogspot.com...



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

So far "my opinion " is backed up once again by the most recent hubble deep field, another 'far as we can see galaxies in every direction' pic.

You did review that?

Hubble Deep Field "South"



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

And that proves what exactly, not assumption but proof
What does it prove



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

It's impossible to predict the odds without all the variables, which we don't have. Also you are trying to make a fallacy of low percentages.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: intrptr

And that proves what exactly, not assumption but proof
What does it prove


It proves that "so far" overtime, every time we develop another instrument to look further we see the same exact thing. Further...

But answer this:

If there is an end to the Universe, what is the barrier, if a barrier what is outside that? and That?

This requires discarding for a moment the altruistic notions of beginnings and endings, the limits of space time and infinity. The notions of how big is big and all those added zeros must evaporate first.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Funny that, beyond anything we can imagine
Beyond time and space, no beginning no end, kinda like God

If there is a beginning to God...you get my point I expect



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Name dropper. Don't switch to "GOD" as an 'answer', that focuses blame. But does bear out humans answer to everything they can't grasp with their 3D mind programming. Look at that mage of the new hubble deep field again. The tiniest dots in there are galaxies.

Imagine putting a Hubble on orbit around a planet in one of those furthest tiniest galaxies and pointing it even further in the same direction. Two guesses what you all see...

Another 'deep field' of galaxies. Point the telescope in any direction form any galaxy and guess what...



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Water flows downhill, life supposedly flows up
Sounds like your own argument let's you down
Funny that

a reply to: SprocketUK



Pass that joint along fella. It's obviously doing wonders.


Is that it, your scientific rebuttal, a cheap swipe about me being on drugs
Care to address the issue rather than trying to make me look like I compared the flow of water downhill to life evolving uphill.

We disagree, I get that, you are welcome to your silly beliefs, allow me the same
If you are going to throw your intellect around, you better get some...


No it was a polite way of saying you answered my point with pure piffle.
You'd have known that if you stepped away from the lectern for a breath though.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Raggedyman

Name dropper. Don't switch to "GOD" as an 'answer', that focuses blame. But does bear out humans answer to everything they can't grasp with their 3D mind programming. Look at that mage of the new hubble deep field again. The tiniest dots in there are galaxies.

Imagine putting a Hubble on orbit around a planet in one of those furthest tiniest galaxies and pointing it even further in the same direction. Two guesses what you all see...

Another 'deep field' of galaxies. Point the telescope in any direction form any galaxy and guess what...


It would appear calculating the odds would be a futile endeavour when one does not have a foundation from which to start.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Raggedyman

Name dropper. Don't switch to "GOD" as an 'answer', that focuses blame. But does bear out humans answer to everything they can't grasp with their 3D mind programming. Look at that mage of the new hubble deep field again. The tiniest dots in there are galaxies.

Imagine putting a Hubble on orbit around a planet in one of those furthest tiniest galaxies and pointing it even further in the same direction. Two guesses what you all see...

Another 'deep field' of galaxies. Point the telescope in any direction form any galaxy and guess what...


It would appear calculating the odds would be a futile endeavor when one does not have a foundation from which to start.

You know how Two Dimensional 'flat land' people have no concept of up?

3D people have no concept of Omniscience.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join