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.
Scientists often feel forced to regard it as almost miraculous. Now two US researchers suggest that, on the contrary, it may have been inevitable.They argue that life was the necessary consequence of available energy built up by geological processes on the early Earth. Life sprang from this environment, they say, in the same way that lightning relieves the accumulation of electrical charge in thunderclouds
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nothing 'just happens.' This is another failed attempt by science to rationalize that which cannot be rationalized.
Let's say that there theory is true that things were "just right" for life on earth. Why earth? Why wasn't it "just right" for pluto?
Honestly,this theory doesn't hold water.
The researchers call this process a "collapse to life", which in their view is as inevitable as the appearance of snowflakes in cold, moist air.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nothing 'just happens.' This is another failed attempt by science to rationalize that which cannot be rationalized. Let's say that there theory is true that things were "just right" for life on earth. Why earth? Why wasn't it "just right" for pluto? Or "just right" for Saturn, or maybe Venus? Honestly,this theory doesn't hold water.
Originally posted by Nygdan
Why do you think the existence of life can' t be rationalized? Its a chemical process.
Let's say that there theory is true that things were "just right" for life on earth. Why earth? Why wasn't it "just right" for pluto?
Because conditions are different there.
I mean, why aren't there plate tectonics on pluto? Because the conditions aren't right for it. Why aren't the conditions right? Well, why should they be? Why is it cold in antarctica and hot at the equator? Because of a miracle, or the amount of insolation?
Why?
The researchers call this process a "collapse to life", which in their view is as inevitable as the appearance of snowflakes in cold, moist air.
Why do you think the existence of life can' t be rationalized?
I mean, why aren't there plate tectonics on pluto? Because the conditions aren't right for it. Why aren't the conditions right? Well, why should they be? Why is it cold in antarctica and hot at the equator? Because of a miracle, or the amount of insolation?
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Because I believe in a God;that's why.
Don't you think it a bit strange that conditions are "just right" on any planet?
are we to also assume that conditions were "just right" for them too, for no other reason than "blind evolution?"
That all life throughout the universe has come into being through the process of "blind evolution."
"Everything just poppped into existence." How crazy is that?
It just,out of no where,popped into existence,huh?
Of course,I am reverting to the creation of the universe,but,this theory here sounds about as ridiculous to me.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nygdan, believe it or not,I can't disagree with anything you said..
Ah...why do I do this?
I think that science is a good tool to use to try and explain things.
That which is unknowable was left in the realm of philosophy and religion. However, since the mid to late 1800s,science has decided,at least in my opinion, to intrude into the arena of philosophy and religion. That,to me, is a big no,no.
However, there has to be an initial source for all things. Anyone knows that you can't get something from nothing.
How has it intruded? Science stays out of metaphysics and the supernatural.
Things come out of nothing, and then go back into nothing.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
Nygdan,
Things come out of nothing, and then go back into nothing.
With all due respect I just cant see how this could be true. It would violate the law of cause and effect or for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Trying to imagine somthing being created from nothing defies logic. I think it would make more sense to imagine they are coming from a parallel univerise or another demension.
Originally posted by etshrtslr
Nygdan,
Things come out of nothing, and then go back into nothing.
With all due respect I just cant see how this could be true. It would violate the law of cause and effect or for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Trying to imagine somthing being created from nothing defies logic. I think it would make more sense to imagine they are coming from a parallel univerise or another demension.
the formation of wormholes therein; speculation arising from this includes the possibility of hyperspatial links to other universes.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nygdan, believe it or not,I can't disagree with anything you said..
Ah...why do I do this?
Here is my actual opinion about science in general. I think that science is a good tool to use to try and explain things. I also think that most scientists want to know if there is a "creative force" presiding over the universe. However,as you alluded,Nygdan, such a question may not even be answerable by science.
Initially science was designed to study what can be known. That which is unknowable was left in the realm of philosophy and religion. However, since the mid to late 1800s,science has decided,at least in my opinion, to intrude into the arena of philosophy and religion. That,to me, is a big no,no.
Chemistry,which is a science I know little about.. As is quite obvious... I am more into physics. Anyway, if chemistry is what caused life on earth to come about, then so be it. However, there has to be an initial source for all things. Anyone knows that you can't get something from nothing.
Originally posted by SmokeyTheBear
creative force does not mean concious, omnicient, omnipontent god.
Originally posted by SmokeyTheBear
Your last statement disproves yourself, because this would also mean that its impossible for god/gods tojust pop into existance
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nothing 'just happens.'
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
This is another failed attempt by science to rationalize that which cannot be rationalized.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Why earth? Why wasn't it "just right" for pluto? Or "just right" for Saturn, or maybe Venus?
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Don't you think it a bit strange that conditions are "just right" on any planet? I assume that there is indeed other lifeforms out there, are we to also assume that conditions were "just right" for them too,
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Honestly,this theory doesn't hold water.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Originally posted by SmokeyTheBear
Your last statement disproves yourself, because this would also mean that its impossible for god/gods tojust pop into existance
You seem to imply that God's existence has the same determining factors as a physical system does. It does not. You cannot apply physical laws to a spiritual body.