Do Aliens Exist?

[sjastro]

Multiverses have to do with infinite sets now because it was pointed out to the atheist scientists that only God can divide by zero.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Moral intuition is not objective. One can easily rationalize doing something immoral such as disobeying God.

That's the point, moral intuition (conscience) is pre-rational. Everyone can rationalize acts contrary to their religion or moral intuition - Christians are no exception. The point is not that one can rationalize immoral acts, but that everyone (barring sociopaths) has moral intuitions, whatever they believe or don't believe.

You may be interested to know that studies have shown that religious believers tend to interpret what they think their god would say about the morality of various acts according to their personal moral intuitions, rather than the other way around - e.g. what they think their god would say varies according to their mood, recent experiences, etc.

BTW, your cells and water citation doesn't hold water. It's before the amino acids can form into proteins in space, on Earth, or wherever. We can't have cells without free amino acids forming proteins.

The citation wasn't about cells, but prebiotic environments. Sorry, I guess it was a bit technical for you.

Your post also seemed a bit confused about the fine tuning problem - if you like I can give you a brief overview.

Also, wikipedia has a reasonable overview of the best current hypotheses for dark energy - based on current physics & cosmology - which are clearly better explanations than invoking a god or gods. A good explanation is coherent, parsimonious, provides insight into and understanding of the phenomenon, is consistent with existing knowledge, and makes testable predictions about the phenomenon. By those criteria, 'God-did-it' is not an explanation, but just a label for a lack of an explanation. You can't explain the unexplained with the inexplicable.

 

[Strathos]

I agree, but I'm not being narrow minded.

All I'm saying is aliens can't happen or else we would've found them by now. Abiogenesis can't happen either or we would've found evidence for it with all the looking. Instead, science found why it can't happen.

If the 'aliens' are just single celled organisms living deep beneath the surface of some far-flung planet or moon, why would you assume we would have found them by now? We're still discovering new species on our own planet all the time.

 

[JohnEmmett]

but the fact is that we simply don't know if there are aliens out there or not

not knowing isn't a fact


I already showed you otherwise

 

[sjastro]

Carbonaceous chondrites are meteorites rich in amino acids.
Currently under peer review but published as a preprint is the first evidence of extraterrestrial protein.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2002/2002.11688.pdf

Here is the non tech version.
https://phys.org/news/2020-03-protein-meteorite.html

 

[jamesbond007]

If the 'aliens' are just single celled organisms living deep beneath the surface of some far-flung planet or moon, why would you assume we would have found them by now? We're still discovering new species on our own planet all the time.

You're confusing what I said about aliens with abiogenesis. They're related, but not the same.

Aliens - intelligent like us; No aliens b/c of Fermi Paradox, Drake's Equation, The Great Filter, and others. Fine tuning makes it difficult for them to live in universe, the same for us in colonizing another planet. Likely we will not be multiplanetary and have an extinction event on Earth as the Bible predicts.

Abiogenesis - Could be a microbe or lower level life; No abiogenesis b/c of no chemical processes to for basic building block of life.

We are alone, but we live on Earth which is the perfect place for life. We are here for a reason. Yet, many people do not believe it despite the evidence probably because creation scientists have been eliminated from peer reviews of secular science.

Anyway, it's okay you don't agree with me, but you'll die without meeting aliens like us and waiting for news that they found lower level life below the surface of Mars or Europa. Again, I don't want to sound macabre, but just using what I learned in creation science. Do you not agree those are the only two places left in our solar system to explore until we can explore the next galaxy with advancements in technology?

 

[Shemjaza]

Regarding BB theory:
What caused the radiation, i.e. where did the energy come from?

We don't know... you don't get to insert answers because you want to.

That fits the creationist universe.

Not even remotely.

Billions of years of development and events before the Earth is even formed is radically inconstant with any Biblical literal interpretation.

What's causing the universe to accelerate in its expansion, i.e. where is the energy coming from? If you say dark energy, then you may as well say God.

Dark Energy is the label, because we don't know what it is and what causes it... just saying "Dark energy is God." is as fallacious as saying "Thunder is Thor.".

Math and physics fits the creationist model better.

How?

Regarding ToE:
There's no transitional fossil evidence. Just evidence for natural selection

Natural selection is a part of evolution, not an alternative.

Using the scientific definition of transitional fossil, my favourite four are:
Archaeopteryx, Tiktaalik, Homo habilis and Homo erectus

If you have some odd personal definition of transitional you better define it and show why we should ue it.

Not really.

You just don't believe in a nested hierarchy? You'll excuse me if "A Creationist says so." isn't a reason to abandon biological science.

Uniformitarianism theory which is wrong. The geologic evidence points towards catastrophism.

Both archaic terms that are not applicable to modern science or evidence.

It's natural selection at work. Has nothing to do with macroevolution.

You'll have to explain what you think those terms actually mean... because in the science of biology one is a part of the other.

We've seen how species can split into two relates varieties; we've seen the genetic remnants of how this has happened many times; we've seen the fossils that demonstrate the phenomena occurring historically.

Thus, all of your reasoning fits creationism.

Only if you redefine everything involved.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You're confusing what I said about aliens with abiogenesis. They're related, but not the same.

Aliens - intelligent like us; No aliens b/c of Fermi Paradox, Drake's Equation, The Great Filter, and others. Fine tuning makes it difficult for them to live in universe, the same for us in colonizing another planet. Likely we will not be multiplanetary and have an extinction event on Earth as the Bible predicts.

Abiogenesis - Could be a microbe or lower level life; No abiogenesis b/c of no chemical processes to for basic building block of life.

We are alone, but we live on Earth which is the perfect place for life. We are here for a reason. Yet, many people do not believe it despite the evidence probably because creation scientists have been eliminated from peer reviews of secular science.

Anyway, it's okay you don't agree with me, but you'll die without meeting aliens like us and waiting for news that they found lower level life below the surface of Mars or Europa. Again, I don't want to sound macabre, but just using what I learned in creation science. Do you not agree those are the only two places left in our solar system to explore until we can explore the next galaxy with advancements in technology?

You'd come across as more intellectually honest if you just said that you don't believe that there's alien life in the universe because it doesn't mesh with your religious views, instead of trying to make yourself sound smart by incorrectly talking about the Fermi Paradox, Drake's Equation, The Great Filter, and abiogenesis like you consistently have done.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

not knowing isn't a fact

It is a fact that we don't know.

I already showed you otherwise

All you have shown so far is pseudoscience, woo, and credulousness.

 

[JohnEmmett]

It is a fact that we don't know.

Again you don't know this.

All you have shown so far is pseudoscience, woo, and credulousness.

The Hopi know.

By calling it woo… you disrespect the knowledge!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Again you don't know this.



The Hopi know.

By calling it woo… you disrespect the knowledge!

You're welcome to your opinion. Mine differs.

 

[JohnEmmett]

You're welcome to your opinion. Mine differs.

You think as atheists think.

 

[Ophiolite]

You think as atheists think.

Fried cucumber lacks structural integrity.

 

[JohnEmmett]

Fried cucumber lacks structural integrity.

you may be right…

 

[Ophiolite]

you may be right…

Modifying members posts in that way is an infringement of forum rules. I'll give you a chance to edit your response so as to avoid being reported.

 

[JohnEmmett]

Modifying members posts in that way is an infringement of forum rules.

I interpreted your meaning

 

[Ophiolite]

I interpreted your meaning

No. You edited my post to suggest that I lacked integrity. You have five minutes to retract the slur.

I see the post has been amended. Thank you.

 

[JohnEmmett]

You edited my post to suggest that I lacked integrity.

I thought you were saying atheism lacks integrity…

I think so.

 

[AV1611VET]

Fried cucumber lacks structural integrity.

Fried cucumber?

You mean "Florida catwalk"?

 

[Ophiolite]

Fried cucumber?

You mean "Florida catwalk"?

No I definitely meant fried cucumber, although zuchinni, but not pumpkins could also have applied. Remember, even if you cannot cogitate, never vegetate.