Moontanman

Jens, UV radiation causes the production of H2O2 in the ice, as it is subducted into the ocean beneath the ice the H2O2 degrades into O2 and H2O and is released into the ocean underneath...

It's almost unbelievable, as along time reef addict the mind is boggled by just how difficult it would be to maintain such a large tank. I am awed by this...

This is the wildest reef aquarium I have ever seen, it must take many tens of thousands of dollars to operate it a year.

I can see a mind being down loaded into a computer if it could live an internal artificial reality, like a directed dream world, I don't how long it would take for that to be deadly boring but it could possibly entertain the disembodied mind between communications with the outside world or it could maintain some sort of internal model of of the sensory input it received where the external reality is as real as ours is to us... Hmmm I think I've been this way before... sounds a bit like us...

You have no more evidence of this than creationists have of the earth being 6,000 years old. The OP at least asked specific questions that could be answered in a specific way. If you use the standard definitions of life then obviously the universe is not alive by those standards. But you can redefine life and speculate endlessly about it but you still have to have a definition of life before you speculate on something being alive. I could change the definition of life and declare a volcano alive but it would still be a volcano not a living thing and only I would think it was alive...

I am going to be honest, this is not my theory, to me it sounds far too good to be true but minds greater than mine say it is at least possible. From what I understand gravity has nothing to do with it except I would have to assume negative mass would have negative gravity and negative mass is necessary for this to work as well as negative energy. I and some others, i think, have provided links to the details of this.

you provided a link to your site as as evidence, spammy at best, feel free to show your own ideas as support for the OP but just pointing out your site with no discussion is not what is going on here. As i have pointed out already in this thread the universe does not conform to the definition of life, I will not debate your link unless you put it in a new thread and not as a link, you need to list what you think makes the universe alive so others can debate you as well with out having to visit your site...

Again, i suggest that if you want to discuss your pet idea that you start another thread. I will not derail this one discussing your ideas...

The expansion of space behind the bubble and contraction ahead of the bubble propels the bubble forward.

Do you realize just how weak your idea is? Scientists do not rely on faith. but do rely on empirical evidence of which your theory has none. I suggest you start a new thread on this if you want to discuss the details... I can see many problems with it...

This is not as cut and dried as you suggest, in fact a great many animals have somewhat less than determinant sexuality. Among fish is is quite common for males to become females and for males to switch to females. some change genders simply due to dominance and in some animals both genders are present in one individual. While what you suggest is true of mammals it is not true of all or even most other animals if you include animals in the scientific sense...

hehehe, and you think I am really in SE Carolina? The plan is working...

I have the feeling we are not quite as far apart on this as you think but I really can't follow you on this...

You have to understand something, the K/T boundary extinction did not kill off everything, among land animals large creatures took the biggest hit. Small animals that could hibernate, crocodiles that could subsist on little food for long periods of time and NO, not everything was killed, not all plant life was killed, you are operating on a mistaken premise, I suggest you do a little more research...

yes, there was some volcanic eruptions that had degraded the environment at the time and there is some idea that there was more than one impact at around that time... these things happen, volcanoes erupt, the environment degrades and comes back. I really don't see your point... Not being absolutely sure and knowing it is one of the things that makes science work so well... a error margin of 11,000 years is pretty good over 65,000,000 years... No, in fact the Krakatoa explosion was many orders of magnitude smaller than the impact even thought to have doomed the dinosaurs... Again not comparable to the asteroid impact that doomed the dinosaurs... Again you assuming that everything died and it took 50 years before there was anything for any animal to eat... how do you figure that? Your belief or lack there of for god has nothing to do with this...

you are assuming the conditions of total darkness lasted million years? no one has asserted that and no evidence for that exists... let us know about some of them... What is your point? A super volcano almost resulted in the extinction of the human race something like 50,000 years ago, trimmed us back to a few thousand individuals... And what?

The Earth core is a solid ball of mostly iron and nickle hotter than the surface of the sun but made solid by the huge pressures of the rest of the planet. As the Earth formed it heated up from impacts, gravitational collapse, and radioactivity. Most of the heavier elements like iron and nickle sank to the center while silicates floated on the top... There has been some speculation on that, i have no idea if any of it is accurate in any way... Biologically i see no reason why animals can't adapt to anything we can... With out technology humans are unlikely to adapt to space either... Why would this be a problem? citation needed please this is not what mainstream science says.. you seriously need to learn to use google...

No, this is not close to accurate... Our thoughts do not fit into this equation at all...

One of us needs to learn the others language dude... I can't follow you on this...

of course the "experts" say that, they are experts at nothing but doing their best to make crop circles mysterious, crop circles are how they make their money lying to people who want to believe. But when put to the test no one was able to determine if the crop circle was man made or alien, in fact the people make them for shows and such make such perfect and complex crop circles that they can fool all the experts... It's a lot like creation science, nothing but lies, disinformation, and misrepresentation, nothing of substance what so ever...

awesome...

Semjase, that video is an outright hoax, the people who did it, did it on a lark to see how easy it was to fool the crop circle crazies... It was special effect studio and the whole thing is an absolute intentional fake...

All crop circles are man made Semjase, the idea of crop circles being anything but man made was refuted a decade ago...