The Theory of Nearly Simultaneous Appearance of Lifeforms on the Planet Earth in their Present State

I wanted to try and make a creationism theory that could be somewhat more accepted than the "God did it" one that many people seem to think is the only explanation.
I call it

"The theory of Nearly Simultaneous Appearance of Lifeforms on the planet Earth in their Present State"

Another possibility for the explanation of the variety of life that exists on the planet Earth is one of instant appearance as is without the need for mutation and adaption. Some possible explanations to explain how something like this might come about could be

1) Superior Life form/forms that have arisen far in the past in a different part of the Galaxy/Universe to achieve a type/class three civilization and thusly the technological capabilities to very rapidly create all life forms on the Planet Earth at the nearly the exact same time as they exist in their current states.

2) A God/Gods/Goddess/Goddesses or any combination thereof from any of the world's Thousands of religious beliefs and/or a God/God's/Goddess/Goddesses from a religion that is completely foreign and remains unknown to the humans of the planet Earth used their magical powers to nearly instantaneously create all forms of life on the planet as they currently exist.

3) An as of yet unexplained unintelligent force/aspect of Science is responsible for all life on Earth appearing nearly instantly at nearly the same time in the current state that they now exist.

4) Future Human Species who have achieved a Class/Type Three civilization who originated on their homeworld of Earth are responsible for the creation of all life on Earth nearly instantly as they exist in their current state by developing and using time travel to go back in time and create a time paradox that remains to be explained by Science.

That is all that I can think of for now but I am sure that there are other explanations. Maybe some involving alternate universes, M theory, string theory, G units or whatever other ideas one could possibly be so inclined to imagine. It is NOT solely about God, it is NOT solely about religion it is ALL INCLUSIVE! It gives every possible theory equal bearing and representation.

Of course if this is taught it better include all possible theories and possible ideas/explanations. You cannot simply say "The Jewish God made everything!" You MUST give EQUAL allowance to the possibility that Zeus created everything, or that The Flying Spaghetti Monster created everything, or that the Reptilian Greys from Xenu created everything.

Any feedback is appreciated from both the creationists and the evolutionists and anyone who practices a different theory beyond these two. Thank you for your time. -Josh

I'd say that consciousness is a result of being an organic biological entity. This would apply to being created in a petrie dish or in a crater of bubbling liquid.

I would almost call into an agnostic thought about the movement of the Universe.

But really, it seems more a "side-effect" of existing on a planet rich in nutritious soil & an adaptable atmosphere.

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps


The evidence we have shows that life hasn't always existed in the present states we see now. The fossil record demonstrates this extremely well.

The thing is, we develop scientific theories on evidence. We generally construct hypotheses on observations; you can form this into a hypothesis, but you need to propose some way of testing it.

Originally posted by idonotcollectstamps
I wanted to try and make a creationism theory that could be somewhat more accepted than the "God did it" one that many people seem to think is the only explanation.

Interesting...

I call it

"The theory of Nearly Simultaneous Appearance of Lifeforms on the planet Earth in their Present State"

I think you're more at the hypothesis stage than at a point where you could call this a theory, at least in the scientific sense.

Another possibility for the explanation of the variety of life that exists on the planet Earth is one of instant appearance as is without the need for mutation and adaption. Some possible explanations to explain how something like this might come about could be

1) Superior Life form/forms that have arisen far in the past in a different part of the Galaxy/Universe to achieve a type/class three civilization and thusly the technological capabilities to very rapidly create all life forms on the Planet Earth at the nearly the exact same time as they exist in their current states.

This suffers from the same root defect as "intelligent design" (i.e. creationism v2.0) - if an alien is the designer of life on Earth, where did the alien come from? Sure, you can claim that it was another alien, but then where did that alien come from? Eventually you get back to the "God did it" of pure creationism or that the first alien in the chain came about naturally, in which case you've negated the need for a designer in the first place.

2) A God/Gods/Goddess/Goddesses or any combination thereof from any of the world's Thousands of religious beliefs and/or a God/God's/Goddess/Goddesses from a religion that is completely foreign and remains unknown to the humans of the planet Earth used their magical powers to nearly instantaneously create all forms of life on the planet as they currently exist.

Meh... the creationists will just claim that the other gods and goddesses are just angels or aspects of their God or something similar. They'll hijack your version as their own, like they did with the Epic of Gilgamesh.

3) An as of yet unexplained unintelligent force/aspect of Science is responsible for all life on Earth appearing nearly instantly at nearly the same time in the current state that they now exist.

See above... they'll just claim it's God.

4) Future Human Species who have achieved a Class/Type Three civilization who originated on their homeworld of Earth are responsible for the creation of all life on Earth nearly instantly as they exist in their current state by developing and using time travel to go back in time and create a time paradox that remains to be explained by Science.

Wasn't this an episode of ST:TNG? If it was, I like it! If it wasn't, it should have been!

That is all that I can think of for now but I am sure that there are other explanations. Maybe some involving alternate universes, M theory, string theory, G units or whatever other ideas one could possibly be so inclined to imagine. It is NOT solely about God, it is NOT solely about religion it is ALL INCLUSIVE! It gives every possible theory equal bearing and representation.

Of course if this is taught it better include all possible theories and possible ideas/explanations. You cannot simply say "The Jewish God made everything!" You MUST give EQUAL allowance to the possibility that Zeus created everything, or that The Flying Spaghetti Monster created everything, or that the Reptilian Greys from Xenu created everything.

I like it! It should be a completely democratic process - one god, one vote!

Any feedback is appreciated from both the creationists and the evolutionists and anyone who practices a different theory beyond these two. Thank you for your time. -Josh

There's no such thing as an evolutionist, any more than there are gravitationists or heliocentrists or germists or circuitists. It's a word created by creationists to single out evolution and make it seem like it doesn't have the same weight of evidence as other scientific theories.

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps

4 sounds like Clarke's "Childhood's End"

Kudos OP on the troll, job well done

Originally posted by PieKeeper
The evidence we have shows that life hasn't always existed in the present states we see now. The fossil record demonstrates this extremely well.

This. If OP's hypothesis was true we'd see 3 billion year old human, lion, etc. fossils. After 100s of years of digging, not even one such fossil has been found. OP's hypothesis has been falsified.

Maybe there was no start. It has always been here. Maybe our minds cannot understand what the truth really is. In the process we try to figure it out. But maybe it is all for vanities sake. Some of us think we know. Some of us are not sure.

There are complications with every proposed way of how life began. In the end I believe that life is a precious thing. Describe it however you must. Art. Poems. Philosophy. Belief. Science. Or just a simple gift. The list goes on and on. It is an enigma.

Well, given that we know life evolved, and not a single species alive today existed like 1mil years ago...your theory is flawed. We know how life evolved, and life today demonstrably didn't just pop up in its current form

reply to post by iterationzero


So you are basically saying our universe is the original and only universe? If you are not saying this, then I am assuming you find it highly likely that there are multiple universes. Would it not be possible that our universe was created, and the original was not?

The major argument here for our universe being a product of creation, would be the order of nature. I, along with a lot of other non-bible creationists, find it highly likely that if a universe were to originate from anything but an intelligence, it would be much more chaotic and disorganized than the constructs of our consciousness and environment. I could see the truth lying somewhere in between I suppose, in the grand scheme, but not when you are looking at our universe alone.

reply to post by sliceNodice

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by sliceNodice

 

Do you have any videos to show me that does not have someone resorting to sensationalism to get his point across. In other words, someone intelligent.

reply to post by sliceNodice


LOOOOOL, attacking Neil DeGrasse Tyson's intelligence is the best you can come up with? How about you refute what he says instead?

For crying out loud, the guy has 13 honorary doctorates, numerous scientific awards, and the following:

2001 The Tech 100, voted by editors of Crain's Magazine to be among the 100 most influential technology leaders in New York.

2004 50 Most Important African-Americans in Research Science.

2007 Harvard 100: Most Influential Harvard Alumni Magazine, Cambridge. Massachusetts

2007 The Time 100, voted by the Editors of Time Magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.

2008 Discover Magazine selected him one of the '50 Best Brains in Science'

Seems like a really dumb guy...right?

Also, the video's 4min57sec long...and you posted your answer 5min after my post. So I highly doubt you actually watched the entire video unless you are able to type a post in 3sec

Originally posted by sliceNodice
So you are basically saying our universe is the original and only universe?

I don't think I said that anywhere in my post. Actually, I don't think I've ever said that in any of my posts.

If you are not saying this, then I am assuming you find it highly likely that there are multiple universes.

That's one hell of an assumption to predicate the rest of your reply on, given that I don't think I've ever made an assertion one way or another on the subject.

Would it not be possible that our universe was created, and the original was not?

Depends if you have evidence for that or not. If you do, feel free to show it. If you don't, than any baseless claim I feel like making regarding the origin of the universe is equally valid.

The major argument here for our universe being a product of creation, would be the order of nature. I, along with a lot of other non-bible creationists, find it highly likely that if a universe were to originate from anything but an intelligence, it would be much more chaotic and disorganized than the constructs of our consciousness and environment.

This sounds suspiciously like the thermodynamic argument that another poster keeps trying to use which has been roundly refuted.

I could see the truth lying somewhere in between I suppose, in the grand scheme, but not when you are looking at our universe alone.

What the evidence for our universe being created? Personal incredulity and misapplication of thermodynamic principles of entropy aren't evidence.

I'd say that's no more a theory than my theory that all matter is fundamentally cream filling from a twinkie and it appears to have different forms because a brain troll is plucking the guitar strings that transmit light energy to your brain, from your eyes.

reply to post by MrXYZ



Lol. Given that we know? Please. It is only a belief that evolution is correct.

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps


Why would this advancd lifeform bury millions of fossils in several hundred sedimentary layers which span billions of years.... all of which can be compared through genetic similaritys into a tree of evolutionary progress....????????????????????????????????????

Seems strange and tedious work so that stupidest people among us will be steered away from their creationist veiwpoint......

Originally posted by Conclusion1
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Lol. Given that we know? Please. It is only a belief that evolution is correct.

Actually, given that evolution is classified as a theory, belief has NOTHING to do with it

Originally posted by idonotcollectstamps
I wanted to try and make a creationism theory that could be somewhat more accepted than the "God did it" one that many people seem to think is the only explanation.

Well this is not a good way to go about finding the truth. How about you try looking at the evidence and see what it tells you ? Instead of trying to make crap up to fit a preconceived idea.


@ MrXYZ
You forgot:
2000 Sexiest Astrophysicist Alive, People Magazine

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps

Why the compressed time? Is that simply to explain why the Bible story says it was all done in a few days?
I don't think you need to take that story totally literally.

If you open up that time window a bit wider, it gives you better correlation with what else we know about life on this planet, including the geologic ages and so forth.

The great contribution of science to this problem was to put together a very convincing argument for the idea that there have been life forms on this planet for a LONG TIME.

Then some jumped to the conclusion that because there was also ample evidence for adaptive variations, that adaptive variation, given that giant time span, could account for the ENTIRE process.

There is very little evidence to support this. But unfortunately, most evidence for a more creationist hypothesis is also anecdotal. I personally happen to trust the word of some of those anecdotal sources enough to think that a creationist explanation is much more plausible.

But for those who would not trust anecdotal sources, I can only offer intuitive arguments:
Why would "natural selection" result in a biosphere as diverse as what we find here? The sheer numbers involved argue for the existence of some creative intention.
And why would "natural selection" result in a biosphere that works as well as this one has? The orderliness in this complexity argues for an intelligent plan.
Additionally, why would "natural selection" result in some of the beautiful and whimsical forms and colors that exist here? This argues not only for the existence of creative intention and orderly design, but a rather advanced sense of beauty in the "creators" of this biosphere.

Originally posted by l_e_cox
Why would "natural selection" result in a biosphere as diverse as what we find here?

Competition between organisms and niche habitats are some good reasons. These encourage and allow species to diverge into more specialized populations to better suit their needs. Even within a niche habitat, you can have niche partitioning where species will utilize different aspects of a niche habitat.

Originally posted by l_e_cox
And why would "natural selection" result in a biosphere that works as well as this one has?

I don't think you can really make an argument for that. This is the only biosphere we've observed in existence. How do we know how "well" this one "works?"

I would say, however, that it's comparable to a free market in economics. Theoretically, it all balances out: predators eat too much prey, the predators starve and the prey rebounds due to a low number of predators; a species is introduced to an island with limited food supply, they diverge and the resulting populations now utilize different aspects of that food supply. I think we can safely predict that extraterrestrial life would have the same sort of relationships we see here on Earth.

Originally posted by l_e_cox
Additionally, why would "natural selection" result in some of the beautiful and whimsical forms and colors that exist here?

Purely subjective. Someone might think that those same "beautiful" forms and colors are extremely ugly. However; bright, colorful organisms can be explained by evolutionary theory. Bright colors in flowers attract pollinators; color patterns in birds attract mates; color patterns in snakes and amphibians can serve as camouflage or as a visual warning to potential predators, etc.