Turn on thread page Beta

why some assume life only exists on earth? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    translating to the best of my abilities from an Arabic book titled "Universe has a God" written by a scientist...
    in a chapter titled "why the beings from other galaxies did not contact us?"

    to which the writer replies
    "there are many probable reasons (since it is all assuming if there is life in other galaxies):

    1- unable to contact us beause they are backward in technology.
    2- we are too backward for them, meaning they did notice us and made observations and decided it was not worth it to contact us because we are very backward.
    3- they are too far from us, the distance that might be about 200 light years and if the beings on other civilization wanted to contact us through wireless waves, it might take 200 light years for the signals to reach us and maybe a signal has already been sent to us but it is still on it's way.
    4-maybe our galaxy did not grab their attention, because around them there might be about 200 thousand stars and some of the stars might have some planets of different types around them, so what is so special about our galaxy that might deviate their attention from those stars and planets towards us?
    5-maybe they have many problems of their own and have no time to explore the outer space?
    6-fear of hostility, maybe they have observed us and have seen the wars and the blood shed and all sorts of problems so they preferred not to indulge themselves in a new adventure that might be harmful to them isntead of beneficial.
    how many science fiction movies have showed nothing but wars between people of different planets/galaxies?
    7-maybe they reached scientific advancement of such a stage that they know traveling between galaxies is either impossible or very risky.
    8-maybe they already sent a space ship to earth long before human beings were there and they could not contact anyone so they went back.

    then he goes on talking about the difficulties we face if we ever want to contact and reach other galaxies.

    very interesting book indeed....
    this is the writer by the way
    Dr. Sabry El Demerdash
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dr-Sab...s/269737355345
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This, except the distance, assumes that their 'logic' of thinking is similar to that of humans.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HadrianH)
    This, except the distance, assumes that their 'logic' of thinking is similar to that of humans.
    maybe, and you can add to the list of reasons that their logic of thinking is entirely different to that of humans, therefore they might not be even aware of a thing as outer space etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The number of planets theoretically existing in the universe, means that even with the really low probability of life developing on one, there should be thousands with life on them.
    Perhaps they have no desire to go into space.
    Perhaps the other worlds with life on lack the necessary metals and technology to build anything capable of surviving in space?
    Life is one thing, but there is no saying that any life forms existing in space are intelligent.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...st-claims.html

    We are the aliens...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chassi)
    The number of planets theoretically existing in the universe, means that even with the really low probability of life developing on one, there should be thousands with life on them.
    Perhaps they have no desire to go into space.
    Perhaps the other worlds with life on lack the necessary metals and technology to build anything capable of surviving in space?
    Life is one thing, but there is no saying that any life forms existing in space are intelligent.
    Within that equation, according to Bill Bryson at least you'd still be at least 200 light years away from your closest neighbour with life.

    Even if there is extremely intelligent life on other planets (which, personally I imagine there is) how intelligent do you need to be to be able to travel hundreds of light years?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...st-claims.html

    We are the aliens...
    The last three songs on the new Muse album are about Panspermia...

    /pointless contribution.
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Group Staff
    They'd have to find us first. We've not even been able to detect a planet other than our own that we can be certain has the right conditions to sustain life, let alone one where there actually is any. The likelyhood of having other life in the universe is high, but for them to have developed enough technology and spent long enough time searching to find us is pretty unlikely.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    They'd have to find us first. We've not even been able to detect a planet other than our own that we can be certain has the right conditions to sustain life, let alone one where there actually is any. The likelyhood of having other life in the universe is high, but for them to have developed enough technology and spent long enough time searching to find us is pretty unlikely.
    true, this brings us to an important point, could all of this be just random and coincidence without a creator?????
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    true, this brings us to an important point, could all of this be just random and coincidence without a creator?????
    Yes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AshMcD)
    Yes.
    yes but a mobile phone cannot be manufactured by itself, not even in 1 billion years of evolution!!!! lol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    yes but a mobile phone cannot be manufactured by itself, not even in 1 billion years of evolution!!!! lol
    A mobile phone is non-living, and no part of it is actually 'mobile' within itself. So it couldn't put iself together. Living cells mutate all the time, making them more likely to become something different, especially 'starter' life forms such as bacteria because their life cycle is so rapid.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chassi)
    A mobile phone is non-living, and no part of it is actually 'mobile' within itself. So it couldn't put iself together. Living cells mutate all the time, making them more likely to become something different, especially 'starter' life forms such as bacteria because their life cycle is so rapid.
    pretty contradictory, where did the "living cell" come from then? out of nothing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    pretty contradictory, where did the "living cell" come from then? out of nothing?
    We don't know, and until science finds the answer I will be contented in not knowing.

    Until there is empirical proof, I will not believe in anything. If there ever is empirical proof I will believe, even if that belief has to be in an almightly overlord.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    pretty contradictory, where did the "living cell" come from then? out of nothing?
    Out of carbon, mostly. The amounts of minerals and chemicals in early seas allowed the formation of many chemicals, which, when joined, created the basis for an organism classifiable as living. Whilst the probabilities of this are low, the amount of time, and chemical combinations make it very possible.
    I accept that you are probably obliged to believe the creationist view, but if everything in the universe was created, by logic it suggests that the creator must also be created. And that could lead back forever. How is it more logical to suggest a supreme entity created itself and everything in the universe, than to suggest that organisms could have evolved by chemical processes?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by saalih)
    pretty contradictory, where did the "living cell" come from then? out of nothing?
    Basically the simple answer is Yes.

    So far we know this

    Energy > Protons + Electron > Atoms > Hydrogen and Helium > Stars > Heavier Elements > Planets > 1st Cell > Life emerged > Life Evolved > "Human are at the end of one branch of the tree of life"

    What came before the energy or before the big bang, physicists are still working on.

    So be patient.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vas876)
    Basically the simple answer is Yes.

    So far we know this

    Energy > Protons + Electron > Atoms > Hydrogen and Helium > Stars > Heavier Elements > Planets > 1st Cell > Life emerged > Life Evolved > "Human are at the end of one branch of the tree of life"

    What came before the energy or before the big bang, physicists are still working on.

    So be patient.
    they will never reach that stage and those who do will have nothing but to admit that there is a Creator...be patient
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chassi)
    Out of carbon, mostly. The amounts of minerals and chemicals in early seas allowed the formation of many chemicals, which, when joined, created the basis for an organism classifiable as living. Whilst the probabilities of this are low, the amount of time, and chemical combinations make it very possible.
    I accept that you are probably obliged to believe the creationist view, but if everything in the universe was created, by logic it suggests that the creator must also be created. And that could lead back forever. How is it more logical to suggest a supreme entity created itself and everything in the universe, than to suggest that organisms could have evolved by chemical processes?
    a Creator is different than the created, a man manufacturing a mobile phone does not have the characteristics of a mobile phone in him....

    we believe God is uncreated, because being created is unGodly....

    but see how you make it sound so easy that carbon was behind a living cell!!! something that cannot do anything by itself was able to create such a complex thing!!! yet when i give the example of a mobile phone it becomes an impossibility!!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    With regards to the thread title/question... Well, we don't really have any proof for it? That's about all that needs to be said.

    Most of your points only really make any sense if the life you're talking about is like us. I think that statistically the chances of us being alone in the universe are tiny, I also think that if we do find life (as it's almost definitely going to have to be in the Solar System, we've got too much serious business killing each other and that crap to make real progress towards extrasolar exploration) it will be microscopic.

    There's that and life on Earth is what it is because it evolved here, unless another planet (who's to say that all life has to exist on planetoids anyway?) is ridiculously similar to Earth it seems silly to assume life will have evolved there to be anything like it is here.

    The article on the building blocks for Earth life coming from a meteorite/s is pretty interesting and not really amazingly surprising I guess, I thought planets like Earth were basically formed by rocks being thrown into each other and I'm sure I heard that bacteria or something found on the remains of space shuttle Columbia having survived exposure to space + reentry.


    edit: luls at ensuing science vs creationism debate. Creationists believe something absurd because they've been told it, science is looking for answers that it will most likely find in time. Can't we just leave it at that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    a Creator is different than the created, a man manufacturing a mobile phone does not have the characteristics of a mobile phone in him....

    we believe God is uncreated, because being created is unGodly....

    but see how you make it sound so easy that carbon was behind a living cell!!! something that cannot do anything by itself was able to create such a complex thing!!! yet when i give the example of a mobile phone it becomes an impossibility!!
    The carbon did not 'create' the living cell. Humans are carbon-based organisms. The human body is entirely made up of the elements.when reactive elements meet each other, they do just that- they react. And in the process they become something new. For example- table salt. Sodium Chloride. Separately, they are a reactive metal, and a highly poisonous gas. Together, they are edible.
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.