Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Speciality Forums >> Science! Astronomy & Space Exploration, and Others

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | (show all)
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: origin of life new [Re: Jarad]
      #5835744 - 05/02/13 07:51 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Being told you are wrong is not persecution.




Just to clarify, we do not tell people that their religion is wrong. That is neither the personal opinion nor the policy of the SASE moderators.

We do tell people that this is the wrong place to discuss religion.

Jarad




But if i make an assertion as to a matter of fact, for example, "Earth has no moon", i would hope someone might say i am wrong But literally, in the world in general, somebody telling you you are wrong is not persecution. Its use in this thread, is hyperbole.

Edited by moynihan (05/02/13 07:55 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
shawnhar
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/25/10

Loc: Knoxville, TN
Re: origin of life new [Re: moynihan]
      #5835795 - 05/02/13 08:33 AM

If "Earth has no Moon" was the basis of you religion, I would not be able to tell you you are wrong. You would feel persecuted, and it would only serve to strengthen your belief, not matter the evidence...get it yet?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Otto Piechowski
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 09/20/05

Loc: Lexington, KY
Re: origin of life new [Re: Qwickdraw]
      #5835898 - 05/02/13 09:51 AM

Quickdraw,

First, "Go Blue"...this is equivocal, do you meant Blue as in the Maize and Blue (University of Michigan) or Blue as in the real, true, good, holy, special, perfect, University of Kentucky Blue?


Second: A theological argument for extra-terrestrial sentient life:

You wrote, "I believe first that God has no reason to create life (at least intelligent life) elsewhere. If you believe in the Christian God you have to ask what motivation would there be to create “another mankind” elsewhere. Are they or us a plan B or C….Did God err in his ways or was his plan perfect due to his wisdom and foreknowledge?"

A Christian holds the eternal Word of God came to the area of Israel/Palestine/Canaan/Judea as the incarnate Jesus of Nazareth and he pretty much remained there his whole life. It would be later that a Roman citizen and Jew by the name of Saul, by his sobriquet of Paul, would travel the technological and political marvels of Roman roads and sea routes to evangelize/proselytize other peoples.

Since Paul took Christianity to other places and peoples to whom Jesus himself did not go, it is not a stretch to imagine that there could be other people (sentient beings) elsewhere (in the same universe) to whom future "Paul's" would evangelize/proselytize. They would then, to use your words, not part of a Plan B or C, but a continuation of Plan A.

Or, am I missing something in what you are saying? Let me know.

Otto


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: origin of life new [Re: shawnhar]
      #5835936 - 05/02/13 10:09 AM

Quote:

If "Earth has no Moon" was the basis of you religion, I would not be able to tell you you are wrong. You would feel persecuted, and it would only serve to strengthen your belief, not matter the evidence...get it yet?




You could say it, but it wouldn't be a point in a fact-based discussion.

This is why Stephen Jay Gould was actually mistaken about his "Non-Overlapping Magisteria" idea. There is, unfortunately, no way to reliably avoid overlap.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: origin of life new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5835971 - 05/02/13 10:27 AM

Quote:

Quote:

If "Earth has no Moon" was the basis of you religion, I would not be able to tell you you are wrong. You would feel persecuted, and it would only serve to strengthen your belief, not matter the evidence...get it yet?




You could say it, but it wouldn't be a point in a fact-based discussion.

This is why Stephen Jay Gould was actually mistaken about his "Non-Overlapping Magisteria" idea. There is, unfortunately, no way to reliably avoid overlap.




I agree. Gould's "Non-Overlapping Magisteria", was a good marketing move for him , but not accurate. Maybe he was angling for the Templeton Prize


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: origin of life new [Re: Otto Piechowski]
      #5836039 - 05/02/13 11:05 AM

Otto, let's stay away from the theological here rather than veer back into it.

As to whether life somewhere else would be a "backup plan" for us, that would assume you understood what the plan was. The observation we do have is that the universe is very big compared to us. We are one planet around one star in one galaxy out of billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars. I think it is a little bit hubristic to assume that we are the sole reason for all that universe.

It seems to me with so many planets out there, it is very unlikely that we are the only life in the universe. The question is how frequent is life. It does seem quite reasonable to me that we may be the only life within a sufficient distance that we may never encounter any other life. But that's due to the vast size of the universe and the inherent difficulties of travelling or communicating over such distances, not because I think we are sufficient justification for the existence of the universe.

At the very least, any creator who had to create all of that just to get us would be very inefficient...

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: origin of life new [Re: Jarad]
      #5836118 - 05/02/13 11:46 AM

Quote:


At the very least, any creator who had to create all of that just to get us would be very inefficient...

Jarad




Or would have a pretty wild sense of humor


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
scopethis
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/30/08

Loc: Kingman, Ks
Re: origin of life new [Re: moynihan]
      #5836146 - 05/02/13 12:04 PM

that's why He made the Platypus and laughed..

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TVG
member


Reged: 05/03/12

Re: origin of life new [Re: Jarad]
      #5836192 - 05/02/13 12:32 PM

One of the more obvious flaws to this type of circular logic of a creator is who or what created the creator? From whence did the creator come from?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
scopethis
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/30/08

Loc: Kingman, Ks
Re: origin of life new [Re: TVG]
      #5836223 - 05/02/13 12:47 PM

alas, the creator would ask the same question of itself...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03

Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
Re: origin of life new [Re: scopethis]
      #5836305 - 05/02/13 01:25 PM

Quote:

alas, the creator would ask the same question of itself...




The book Sum: Forty Tales from the Afterlives has one heaven where when Mary Shelley dies, she get put in charge, God blaming her for writing Frankenstein, and starting him to think in new ways about a creator's relationship to the created, and if he is respondsibile for what a created thing does...He takes a time out to try and deal with that.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
EJN
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 11/01/05

Loc: 53 miles west of Venus
Re: origin of life new [Re: moynihan]
      #5836425 - 05/02/13 02:17 PM

This thread has run off the rails and is in danger of completely derailing
and running into an oncoming freight train.

Since the subject is the "origin of life" then the problem can be framed
as how do biological systems arise from prebiotic conditions in terms of
chemistry & molecular biology?

It would seem the minimum necessary requirement is a molecule which can
encode information which is both self-replicating and can function as
as a catalyst, like enzymes in modern cells do.

A likely candidate is RNA, which has led to the RNA World hypothesis, a term
coined by Walter Gilbert, a former theoretical physicist turned Nobel
Prize winning molecular biologist.

RNA can carry genetic information in the sequence of bases (purines &
pyrimidines), can replicate that information, and in configurations
known as Ribozymes can function as an "honorary" enzyme.

In this scenario, RNA predated both DNA and proteins (all enzymes are proteins,
but not all proteins are enzymes). The main problem is how RNA or a similiar
molecule arose from pre-biotic conditions. The problem appears difficult, but
not impossible.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
scopethis
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/30/08

Loc: Kingman, Ks
Re: origin of life new [Re: EJN]
      #5836516 - 05/02/13 02:50 PM

if we have found portions of the "building blocks of life" in meteors, wouldn't this suggest that the Universe is well populated?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
buddyjesus
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/07/10

Loc: Davison, Michigan
Re: origin of life new [Re: scopethis]
      #5836614 - 05/02/13 03:45 PM

don't think that would rule out comtamination. I look forward to the asteroid recovery mission.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: origin of life new [Re: buddyjesus]
      #5836663 - 05/02/13 04:11 PM

I think it would suggest that the universe is well-supplied with building blocks. It doesn't answer the question of how often they get put together properly to form life.

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: origin of life new [Re: scopethis]
      #5837470 - 05/02/13 11:39 PM

Quote:

if we have found portions of the "building blocks of life" in meteors, wouldn't this suggest that the Universe is well populated?




Not really, because "well" is a subjective adjective, and we don't know how well well is.

It does suggest, though, that life elsewhere is not impossible. It has no implications about how abundant or rare that life might be.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: origin of life new [Re: EJN]
      #5837487 - 05/02/13 11:48 PM

Quote:

This thread has run off the rails and is in danger of completely derailing
and running into an oncoming freight train.

Since the subject is the "origin of life" then the problem can be framed
as how do biological systems arise from prebiotic conditions in terms of
chemistry & molecular biology?

It would seem the minimum necessary requirement is a molecule which can
encode information which is both self-replicating and can function as
as a catalyst, like enzymes in modern cells do.

A likely candidate is RNA, which has led to the RNA World hypothesis, a term
coined by Walter Gilbert, a former theoretical physicist turned Nobel
Prize winning molecular biologist.

RNA can carry genetic information in the sequence of bases (purines &
pyrimidines), can replicate that information, and in configurations
known as Ribozymes can function as an "honorary" enzyme.

In this scenario, RNA predated both DNA and proteins (all enzymes are proteins,
but not all proteins are enzymes). The main problem is how RNA or a similiar
molecule arose from pre-biotic conditions. The problem appears difficult, but
not impossible.




The other big question it leads to is whether RNA, and by extension DNA, is the default pathway for metabolically active replicators. Or alternatively, how many plausible inheritance molecules could exist?

My assumption has always been that DNA for life on earth, rather than some other molecule, is a historical happenstance, an evolutionary die that was cast in the distant past. But if the RNA world is a predictable result for conditions amenable to life, and necessary for it to move past protocells, then my assumption would be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
StarWars
Mr. Postmaster Man
*****

Reged: 11/26/03

Loc: At the Gym >Spudtastic<
Re: origin of life new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5837518 - 05/03/13 12:18 AM



The human being is a complex bag of water and most likely did not evolve from a turnip or platypus... (sorry Darwin)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: origin of life new [Re: StarWars]
      #5837630 - 05/03/13 03:44 AM

Sorry Darwin?

Do you know of anywhere that Darwin, or any other scientist, for that matter, claims humans evolved from a turnip or a platypus?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Qwickdraw
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/03/12

Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Re: origin of life [Re: Jarad]
      #5837690 - 05/03/13 06:28 AM

Quote:

I think it would suggest that the universe is well-supplied with building blocks. It doesn't answer the question of how often they get put together properly to form life.

Jarad




"get put together" would suggest intervention which is entirely plausable IMO


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | (show all)


Extra information
1 registered and 3 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  LivingNDixie, FirstSight, JayinUT 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 8447

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics