We've only been able to explore the tiniest fraction of the universe in terms of life-sustainability, and you're already calling it quits? This is the true danger of belief in the supernatural. It stifles scientific inquiry. You're ready to throw in the towel and say "God did it!" at the virtual drop of a hat. Let's see how many more metaphors I can mix.

They're all three beings in one... seperate but same at the same time. it's the mystery of the trinity. I look at it as if they're all the same person doing different duties... God writing the speech, Christ delivering it, and the Holy Spirit helping us live our lives according to it, though i had a better metaphore for it before... forgot it though...

Edit: sorry hrae, didnt see your post till i posted; and im not calling it quits, i said every planet we've discovered not everyone in the universe. But where exactly does the scientific theory on how LIFE began originate? like, where does science say life comes from? (and im asking sincerely)

Note, that when a Catholic refers to a Mystery (capital M), it's basically a way of saying, "This doesn't make much sense to us, either, but we're running with it."

Not really, acctually. its just something that's beyond our understanding, but we believe in and have faith in it and hope that we'll understand it someday.

How does that differ substantially from what I just said?

Idk, i guess it doesnt. but my point is that we arent just blind sheep. Alot of this stuff makes sense to some degree, it's just hard to understand. that's where the faith aspect comes into play.

In my belief on how Life could have sprawled on Earth (I have no evidence to back this up though) is certain energies (Magnetic, Electrical, Thermal, etc) interacting with each other in very tiny spaces (Pre-Life Earth was very violent) eventually came to form small spheres of contained energy (Atoms).

These Atoms eventually became greater in number until they began to either bond, react, or just pass each other by. Molecules were slowly made and as more complicated molecules were formed, they eventually started needing an area to catalyze their reactions in. The small areas where many molecules gathered eventually evolved into cells. Various molecules would give off byproducts to cause a reaction in another molecule.

As the cells grew up and more complex reactions were occurring, cells began to become self-sustaining organisms. However, competition for raw materials became harsh and thus we begin evolution. Several Bacterium could have combined through mutual relationships and formed multicellular creatures. The creatures evolved to try to be better (and thus get better access to food, resources) and we eventually wind up to where we are today.

Just a personal theory. Nothing to back it up though.

where did the want and need to sustain ones self come from though?

Probably natural chemical reactions within the primitive cells. Lower animals (insects, vermin, bacteria) have this animal 'instinct' and show the need to survive. However, we never consider them sentient or intelligent.

where does the instinct come from though? that's what confuses me. where do they get the need to sustain themselves?

That's not far off, actually. While the abiogenesis question isn't completely answered, there are several explanations, including the RNA-world and iron-sulfur-world models which seem viable. Time, observation, and experimentation will tell.

It's just like how did we get this "soul"? Normal animals show some primitive emotions, but we never see animals "aware" of themselves, their actions, and none try to ever debate their origin or other scientific things.

That may be how the Divine being comes in.

It's an evolutionary strategy. Pair-bonding that is purely monogamous provides a ''stable'' base for potential high-quality offspring. Logical enough?



Try looking at it from another way. Would there be an idea of a God if we did not exist? Similar to the philosophical staple of ''Does a falling-tree make a sound if noone hears it?'' In a billion possibilities where it didn't turn out so well, there wouldn't be anyone to ask that question, maybe it just so happens that it did.

Life may exist in forms that we have not discovered, sentience is much rarer true, but not possibly low enough to be dismissed. Out of the millions of systems and uncounted planets, are you truly confident enough to dismiss them all?


Evolution is a likely answer. Organisms without any drive would very obviously not bother to do anything. They die = no propagation of DNA. Even the simplest of single-celled organisms will try to sustain itself and eventually reproduce.

That's like asking "if you fixed and then broke a video camera, would you have ever created it?" Just because we arent here doesnt affect the existance of anything that came before us.

And once again, i never dismissed the theory of life on other planets, i clearly said the planets that we have discovered harbor no life. im simply asking, is it truly probable that everything around us was formed by chance?

it is quite true even though i am only 13 this is what i think. humans ar exactly like animals. they can also be life all over in other planets however slight the chance is. The divine or god as people will call it can possibly be a little atom or something tht gave a tiny jerk into life. for their isnt any proof tht god actually exists. So i am forced to believe tht people who call this god a god is actually or possibly be a atom a particule the universe or other countless possibilities.

We may want to be careful on that though. It makes me remember a science fiction story I read once of an alien race that was heavy into exploring and science. One of their scouts lands on a planet that has life, only to find that the creatures on the planet were very well developed psychically. The creatures boarded the scout's ship and went to the race's homeworld. The curious alien race that was so eager to find life was enslaved for thousands of years due to their nature.

Sad tale. Irrelevant to our discussion, but a sad tale.

To use an example that Douglas Adams once used, "...imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for. "

That is again based on the assumption that there was a pregenitor who created everything to begin with. The whole point of the thread.



Of the planets that we have discovered, how many have actually been scoured for what we term as life? Two?

Might be a mite too early to make assumptions.


^Hitchhiker?

Should really read that.

so basically you're saying not to feel too content with our surroundings to the point that when things change we have no ability to adapt?

EDIT: that was meant for hrae.

I do believe that there might be life on other planets, im simply saying is it at all likely that all life in the universe was formed by chance?

The point is to not have the hubris to think that just because we fit well into this environment that it was made to order, i.e., that the universe was created to suit our needs.

If chance is what you call it, why not?

*sigh* ok, i put my point into the wrong way. forget all possibilities of alien lifeforms. my point is, is it at all probable that everything we see is simply done by the flip of a coin? that the big bang just luckily scattered dust into the right places?

im not contented with dismissing my existance as a roll of the dice, a flip of a coin... it just doesnt seem right.

Again I have to ask, why not?


There is a difference between what we want and what is. Believe me, I want to believe in a being who cares about everyone, can do anything, and knows all there is. That there will be a balance and accountability for good and evil, punishment and reward for a life lived well. I just have trouble reconciling this world (and the suppositions of most religions) with what I see as reality in the present. Does not the presence of Evil itself contravene the edict that God is both All-Powerful or that he is All-Good? Both cannot be true.

It doesnt if you add in the factor that he's like our father; he wants us to do good on our own accord, not because he makes us. we had this debate earlier in the thread, you should go back and look at it

I might have lost that somewhere in the 300+ replies. Stilted somewhat by the fact that he's killed off people in some questionable circumstances. The rape and pillage by the Israelites of the native inhabitants of the Promised Land, whose only crime seemed to be existing. I'd list some more but...


And again why not? It can't just be because it doesn't feel right.

Since the talk has somewhat moved to evolutionary theory, I have never quite understood a few things.

First of all natural selection, which was the basis of how Darwin thought of evolution, is always explained as an animal adapting to it’s surroundings in order to survive.

For example, there are short neck giraffes and long neck giraffes. As food supply becomes less the long neck giraffes survive while the short neck giraffes die off. This leaves only long neck giraffes to have children producing long neck giraffes. This I completely understand and is logical, especially seeing the vast number of variables that DNA and RNA give to adapting to your surroundings.

What I don’t understand is the evolutionary leap that must be made to create a new species, and if we again take the above example.

There are short neck giraffes and long neck giraffes. As food supply becomes less the long neck giraffes survive while the short neck giraffes grow wings and become vultures. This leaves long neck giraffes to have children producing long neck giraffes. And short neck giraffes are now vultures and have vultures as children. This I completely don’t understand and is not logical.

But that is how evolution happens correct. One animal becomes a different animal leaving both the original and the new but nothing in between.


If this is going in a tangent that the OP does not want than just disregard my post.

Why not what? the dice thing? because i believe the chances are far too slim for everything to be made off of a roll of the dice.

It...doesn't work that way. Short-neck giraffes getting wings is a process that would conceivably take so long that the short-necks would all die before any such mutation could take place. Also, the mutation to get wings strong enough to actually fly and adapt the rest of the giraffe into a vulture would take millions of years if it happened at all. Far more conceivable that a vulture would have evolved from another bird-like creature that would require less mutation. It's a slow process xD


No. Why can't you believe that it's all by ''chance?'' Other than your given reason that it doesn't feel right. I could say that there's no God because it doesn't feel right and that'd be about the same level.

the chances of all life being created by a roll of the dice is far too low.

A definitive statement with no citation or proof = opinion


Reply = The chances were enough.


Current statements cannot be proven one way or another = ?

So if you start with a bird and end with a bird.

Or start with a giraffe end with a giraffe.

There is no evolving into other life forms.

:lost:

back to the discussion at hand.

i just mean that they're far too low to make me believe in them.

At the stage of development where you already have existing giraffes and vultures, it stands to reason that there would be other avian life-forms. It's more reasonable in the situation you proposed that Vultures evolved from a pre-existing life form that was already avian.


The ''bird-like creature'' that I typed in the first para probably evolved from something that was less birdlike that evolved from something that was even less birdlike and you go back the chain until you get something that wasn't birdlike at all. That's the simplest I can put it...adaptations to environment over time + natural selection + mutations in genetic code = result in organisms that eventually don't resemble their base at all. That's evolution anyway.

Yes the chances are low, but there are infinitely more universes, or galaxies out there that may have had the big bang. And maybe for our galaxy the chances worked out.

Jik, there's this saying, I don't know the exact words, but I think it's something related to the anthropic principle. It goes something like, "If there is a closet in which there are an exceedingly large number of clothes of all kinds and colours and sizes, you shouldn't be surprised to find a few that fit you.


Also, I think Hrae has a great point with the puddle example.

Manz,
When a single cell existed, it adapted to it's surroundings (as far as we know, water), and multiplied. When competition for survival in the water grew, some cells adapted to land, and eventually to air. By this time, there were probably many multi-cellular organisms, which in turn evolved into a species we recognise in their own way, based on what they needed to adapt to.

but what gave the cell life? what gave the cell the ability to adapt? what gave the cell the need to live?

We do not know that yet, but ascribing it to god does not help.


Since you have not commented on it, have you accepted the anthropic principle?

If it's unexplainable at this point, how is ascribing it to an unexplainable force make anything non-sensical? we dont know exactly what gives things the need to live; we dont understand it. so doesnt it make sense that it would be caused by something we dont understand?

No, it doesn't. Let's go back in time to when eclipses weren't understood. They weren't caused by anything "unknown". Planetary motion, formation of shadows etc. People jumped at the god/devil did it explanation, and look how wrong they were. Have some patience, trust in logic and rationality. You won't go too far wrong.

EDIT: Saying it is caused by something we don't understand ATM is one thing, but saying we can never understand it because god did it is just plain lazy.

No, im not saying we cant understand it. To me, the whole point of science is to see what God did to form everything. im not trying to write it off.