Now, now, the "space brothers" may have engineered us. But if we
evolved from apes what did the apes evolve from? "Shakti" is the life
force that animates living things, at least as Indian philosophy labels
it and science hasn't yet figured that one out though apparently trying to.
On 10/27/2014 11:44 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
Yeah, I read the article. But I know scientists who agree with me
that intelligent life on our neighboring planets may not exist "as we
know it" because conditions on those planets may have evolved life in
a different way than we would even recognize. Humans are SO VAIN!
I'll counter that with the idea that, apart from carbon, there isn't
anything else to make life out of as nothing else can form the sort of
complex chain molecules that make up the only life we know of. Water
is essential to that process so it seems smart to narrow the search to
worlds like ours.
Other exo-biologists claim that's crap and have formulated chemical
possibilities made out of all sorts of things. How credible they are
will only be demonstrated when we've explored the solar system
properly and checked the atmosphere of Jupiter for lifeforms. There's
even speculation about electricity based life on neutron stars as a
possibility. But the more possible varieties you come up with makes it
even harder to answer the question, where is everybody?
Nature loves to replicate itself even on our own planet so logic sez
that human like beings might exist on a lot of other planets in this
universe where conditions warranted them developing the way they did
here. We're mostly just souped up amoebas.
I don't think nature has created humans more than once, we are just
apes, branching off from our ancestors and so on backwards. Look at
all the other creatures that might have got the "lucky" break of our
type of consciousness. Any one of them, but none of them did. And how
likely was that? Easily might never have happened just like all other
lucky breaks we needed to create us, and even from day one when our
cells combined with bacteria. Was that one on a billion or even more?
And it only happened once (and survived) and it created all life we
see, everything is descended from the same cell! Aint that romantic!
And probably rather unlikely as it took 3.5 billion years before the
accident happened, so it might just as easily never have happened.
These are the sort of variables that need to be answered before we can
say with any confidence how likely it is that we are alone but it
looks like a lot of flukes happened here, which seems to make it
unlikely they happened anywhere else.
Given that the organic matter to make up life seems to be everywhere I
can see there are loads of planets with seas full of simple celled
life. Maybe one or two has had the unlikely accident of complex cells
and maybe one or two of those has a biosphere as varied as ours, but
how many have intelligent, scientific life with technology. How likely
was it given the amount of time that passed before we got there, and
why did it happen to us? And what are the chances of there being two
civilisations existing at the same time with technology similar enough
that we could communicate?
Best part is we might get answers to these questions very soon, we
will at least be able to tell if the Earth like planets we've found
recently have life on them by studying their atmospheric composition.
If they find any gases like methane they will know that there is life
because they are reactive and will combine with other gases present
and so have to be constantly created by some biological process. A
signature of alien life! We wont be able to tell from that what sort
of complexity it has but it'll be fascinating to know that at least
some of the variables have been settled..
On 10/27/2014 09:19 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <noozguru@...>
<mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :
He should go back to playing guitar. Hope he doesn't write computer
code because his logic would be very flawed.
He actually played keyboards, but yes the logic as applied here is
awful. But that's the fault of the Daily Mail's hysterical need for a
catchy headline, our Brian wouldn't ever claim actual certainty for
anything like this, though he might make a good argument for it being
vanishingly unlikely. I shall watch the show and see what he does say.
On 10/27/2014 06:02 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
We are alone in the universe: Professor Brian Cox says alien life is
all but impossible as humanity is 'unique'
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2809183/We-universe-Professor-Brian-Cox-says-alien-life-impossible-humanity-unique.html>
image
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2809183/We-universe-Professor-Brian-Cox-says-alien-life-impossible-humanity-unique.html>
We are alone in the universe: Professor Brian Cox says a...
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2809183/We-universe-Professor-Brian-Cox-says-alien-life-impossible-humanity-unique.html>
The presenter and scientist blames a series of 'evolutionary
bottlenecks' for the lack of extraterrestrial life on other planets,
despite there being a vast...
View on www.dailymail.co.uk
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2809183/We-universe-Professor-Brian-Cox-says-alien-life-impossible-humanity-unique.html>
Preview by Yahoo
I'm kinda with the prof here, but we don't know enough of the
variables to be able to say it with any certainty. One thing is for
sure though: there's no intelligent life in the Daily Mail comments
section...
