Moontanman

I'm still having the same problems as before, no date, no time, no post number or label under my avatar....

Everyone needs to believe something, I believe I'll have another beer...

There is a code buried in the value of pi, it tells the name of the true creator of the universe, of course you have to have the key to understand it and only I have the key and I'm not telling!

The first $500k takes my kidney but you have to pay all hospital costs.....

Ok, i have intentionally not done a lot of google searches to support my idea, I wanted to give my idea in it's rawest form, and allow all of us debate the potentials, metabolism first comes closest to matching my scenario metabolism first but some recent work seems to discount this process. metabolism was not first I see no reason to try and pretend I have some special knowledge nor do i want to consistently ignore other peoples ideas against my idea. this is big part of my idea as is this More links both pro and con http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081218213634.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090109173205.htm My idea of a synergy between many different natural processes producing life is not unique, a short google search will confirm this but as each of the leading ideas continuously beat each other over the head i wonder if all of them could be correct but still flawed because they insist on only their idea working when a combination of many different processes is more likely to have turned the key to life as we know it....

I am referring to the processes that take simple molecules and turn them into complex living molecules. It's called metabolism. http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter6-6.php Since this is my idea or at least my take on a number of possibilities I'm not sure a proof exists The links I provivided exactly that. I see no reason why this could not be done , all you need is test tube the size of the earth and a few million years to observe....

I see no reason to assume that when we see what appears to be a large artificial object floating along silently that anti gravity or some other pseudo science effect is taking place. Of course I don't have the hubris to think we know everything there is to know either and there just might be some tricks of physics we are simply unaware of...

One thing I'm trying to say, and this is important, is that the processes of life we see taking place inside a cell at one time took place outside the confines of a cell. The mechanisms we think of as life is really the condensation of many processes that we see now inside a simple cell that took place in many different areas, places like mica sheets, clay crystals, oceanic ridges (black smokers and cold seeps), lightning flashes, UV radiation, waves crashing on rocky beaches, upwelling of oil (yes oil existed before life), all these things contributed to the process we call life. Catalysts were literally the catalyst that brought about ever increasing complexity. Catalysts are not just platinum causing hydrogen to react with oxygen and coming out the end of the reaction unchanged. Some catalysts actually produce more catalysts than you had at the start of the process. The catalysts that made more copies of themselves were selected for, these catalysts acted on the organic chemicals being produced by the above mentioned processes, the by products of the catalytic reactions went back into play and were acted on by the mica sheets etc, these chemical loops slowly brought about the increase in complexity. These processes took place over millions of years and trillions of actual reactions each year. This process acting over time as the chemicals were processed by the two competing processes eventually began to come together in various ways. I am still working on the details but i see RNA being produced as by the processes of ever increasing complexity of the catalysts, RNA is just a complex catalyst (in my scenario anyway) but lipid bubbles concentrating the chemicals and drifting catalysts being able to more successfully copy themselves inside the lipid bubbles figures big in my idea... Rigney, it is a bit more complex that a few carbon rocks reproducing but i do see your objection and the complex organics being produced by natural means as shown in the links in my original post is my answer to your objection... One thing should be added and to me this is the weakest link, I am sure there were natural processes that took place then that are not reproduced by life we have now. i am sure than once life as we know it got started the cells streamlined their reactions quickly and unnecessary reactions were trimmed away fast. i am also sure that both chemosynthesis and photosynthesis both started before there were cells and life as we know it.

My assertion is that a process similar to what we describe as evolution to life took place before life as we know it existed and produced the first life forms as we define them. This chemical evolution progressed from simple carbon compounds to actual living cells via a process very similar to evolution and it happened the same way via natural selection, no original information was necessary.

No I'm not making this up as we go along, you are not paying attention but lets agree to disagree on this and allow the thread to go back to it's original question...

I agree, that would be a great idea!

I think the real answer to the OP is None

Ok, my typo here I meant to say one of the three things not all of them... my apologies i object due to the big lie that the money collected by religion goes to help people, the vast majority of it goes to religion, not helping anyone. As far as missionary work while you obviously think it's a good thing to go and try to change a culture to fit what you think is right and wrong I think it's a bad thing, destroying someone else's culture in the name of a non existent god cannot be good... Why should you be able to annoy the shit out of me in public? Why shouldn't your crass disrespect for me and every one who doesn't agree with you be all over the radio, TV, magazines, bill boards, and knocking on my front door every Friday morning? If you have to ask that question i see no chance you would understand the answer. As for what you do in church, i could not possibly care less, blow Sunshine up each others skirt and tell your selves what wonderful people you are because god loves you? Beat each other with sticks, pretend to speak in tongues , roll on the floor in a spastic fit for the greater glory of god? drink poison? (go for it) Kill rattle snakes slowly by keeping them cold and denying them water and food? (this i do think is wrong, snakes are living creatures and should not be tortured to death) Hold orgies of self fulfilling prophecy, I really don't care but keep it out of my face! So atheists regularly preach from street corners where you live? TV and radio is swamped with adds begging you for money to help the atheist cause? Bill boards proselytize from every intersection? Atheists knock on your door Friday morning to ask you to reject god? bullshit.....

You have absolutely no evidence of intelegent aliens much less aliens writing hamlet. I never claimed that having the correct ingredients and circumstances for life will produce intelligent life. As a matter of fact i happen to be a member of the "Rare Earth" school of thought, life is common, i expect life to be found in our solar system on at least 4 different planets/moons. Intelligent life is another matter altogether. The idea that intelligent life means they write hamlet is just silly severian.... The contention here was life vs god, we have a planet full of life but no evidence of god. this i have to admit does not prove there is no God but it shows we have evidence of life and lots of circumstantial evidence that life might exist on other planets but life does not = intelligence nor does intelligence = hamlet. Now please stop putting words in my mouth severian....

So if a method of propulsion isn't explainable by us it must either be bullshit or violate the laws of physics? 300 years ago a Frisbee would have been inexplicable by the common man who observed it and without realistic understanding would have been assumed a violation of the laws of the universe. I see no reason to assume an unknown means of propulsion violates these laws because we don't know how it works. The real problem here is that even if you just go with inexplicable sightings of UFOs there is still no reason to assume things like anti gravity or some other violation of physics, some do indeed do inexplicable things but a helicopter would have quite inexplicable to science 200 years ago if for no other reason no power source was available to run it. Most of this is not even fringe science... And of course helicopters, airplanes, hover craft, and the things that uses electricity to hover a small platform. Just because we don't understand how it's done doesn't make it impossible. Just because it's quiet or seems to use huge amounts of energy doesn't make it impossible...

Evolution has meaning beyond that which we assign to it in regard to life. Stars evolve, the evolution of stars is a known quantity, planets evolve, anything that changes evolves. Decent is exactly what I am saying happened, organic chemicals over time became more complex due to processes that produced more and more complex chemicals due to selection that favored more complex chemicals. With out the sources of the organic chemicals this could never have happened, without the catalysts in competition with each other for these resources this could never have happened. The two processes driven toward complexity by this competition for resources resulted in life. My assertion is that under the circumstances of abundant energy, abundant organic chemicals and catalysts that competed with each other for resources natural selection resulted in life....

I can think of several things that a human proboscis would be useful for, sadly none if them can be discussed on this forum....

Over and over we hear that evolution is not part of abiogenesis, that evolution via natural selection did not start until life had already formed. This leads to ideas that life is a very low probability occurrence, a figure 10^-41,000 of how unlikely the formation of life was is often bandied about as though it were the truth. I say that life is a natural occurrence driven by natural selection of the organic chemicals that come about naturally in the conditions of the early Earth. These organic chemicals and the action of organic catalysts is what brought about life. Natural selection of the chemicals that contribute to the reactions that bring about more of themselves by acting on other chemicals being produced by various natural reactions. The synergy of catalysts that drive reactions that result in more copies of themselves coupled with the huge influx of reactants provided by a great many mechanisms that imitated metabolisms acted on by these organic catalysts results in reproducing systems of naked metabolisms, the catalysts are the basic precursors to RNA and DNA. RNA and DNA do not, as many have asserted, represent information, they represent catalysts that make better copies of themselves than other catalysts. We see them as information storage due to our own chauvinism not due to any real information content. The cells, from eubacteria to protists to elephants is just catalysts making more complex coverings to insure more copies of themselves. The catalysts that make more copies tend to survive and make more copies, those that did not were over whelmed by the ones who did. RNA and DNA are just very complex catalysts competing to make more copies. The entire process was driven by natural selection, from catalysts floating in the soup of organic chemicals to lipid bubbles full of organic chemicals. The lipid bubbles were a much more concentrated source of chemical "food' for the catalysts, those catalysts that promoted the existence of lipid bubbles tended to be more successful. No magical thinking required, just time and chemicals. Here are some of the sources of organic chemicals these catalysts used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron-sulfur_world_theory http://originoflife.net/crystals/index.html http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071204102500.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/12/021204080856.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100513143457.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071204102500.htm