The Flying Skeptic Wrote:People believed that there was no other explanation for the weather than gods for hundreds of years. Now after hundreds of years, we have meteorology. We have only just begun to understand DNA for the past 60 years. We should be more optimistic about science with the fact in mind that arguments from incredulity as explanations for nature have been superseded by naturalist explanations time and time again in history.

Until the moment in history when abiogenesis isn't a complete failure please refrain from using it as explanation for the origin of life.

IceSage Wrote:Do you exist, yes or no?

Yes.

(September 18, 2010 at 3:57 am)blood_pardon Wrote:

The Flying Skeptic Wrote:The research for abiogenesis has not ceased.

Which doesnt change the fact that as of today September 18, 2010 it has so far FAILED in explaining the origin of life.

The fact that it hasn't isn't the same as meaning that it can not.

(September 18, 2010 at 3:57 am)blood_pardon Wrote: No one has yet to give a BETTER explanation for our existance than God did it. If they have on this thread please by all means quote them...

"God did it" is as much an answer to the perponderance of life as "god" is the answer to X^2+2x+4 (where you must solve for X).
Science says "I dont' know the answer to that question, but if I fiddle around with the numbers, I could solve for X using a few techniques but that will require some research."
Religion says "god" is eternal. He created X^2, x+2, and 4 in his infinate wisdom. The number 1 died for the sins of the other numbers precisely so that the problems could be answered without God's intervention so that everyone may find their own answer in god. We can never truely know what X is, but if you put your faith into it, you can find the answer to be god."

(September 18, 2010 at 5:18 pm)blood_pardon Wrote:

The Flying Skeptic Wrote:People believed that there was no other explanation for the weather than gods for hundreds of years. Now after hundreds of years, we have meteorology. We have only just begun to understand DNA for the past 60 years. We should be more optimistic about science with the fact in mind that arguments from incredulity as explanations for nature have been superseded by naturalist explanations time and time again in history.

Until the moment in history when abiogenesis isn't a complete failure please refrain from using it as explanation for the origin of life.

"Magic man done it because there is no other explanation to date."




I'm not as arrogant as you; I do not claim to know an explanation for life or the universe, and unlike you I don't resort to arguments from incredulity when in doubt.

Natural selection and abiogenesis.

Quote:The Drake equation states that:



where:

N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;

and

R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
fp = the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.[3]

The old results are

Quote: * R* = 10/year (10 stars formed per year, on the average over the life of the galaxy)
* fp = 0.5 (half of all stars formed will have planets)
* ne = 2 (stars with planets will have 2 planets capable of developing life)
* fl = 1 (100% of these planets will develop life)
* fi = 0.01 (1% of which will be intelligent life)
* fc = 0.01 (1% of which will be able to communicate)
* L = 10,000 years (which will last 10,000 years).

Drake's values give N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 10.

But the new results are:

Quote:Current estimates (see below):

R* = 7/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 0.33, fi = 0.01, fc = 0.01, and L = 10,000 years
N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 2.31 (so two communicative civilizations exist in our galaxy at any given time, on average, plus two hundred more that are not trying to communicate).

But a pessimist might equally well believe that suitable planets are rare, life seldom becomes intelligent, and intelligent civilizations do not last very long:

R* = 10/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 0.01, fl = 0.13, fi = 0.001, fc = 0.01, and L = 1000 years
N = 10 × 0.5 × 0.01 × 0.13 × 0.001 × 0.01 × 1000 = 0.000065 (we are almost surely alone in our galaxy).

Alternatively, making some more optimistic assumptions, assuming that planets are common, life always arises when planets are favorable, 10% of civilizations become willing and able to communicate, and then spread through their local star systems for 100,000 years (a very short period in geologic time):

R* = 20/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 1, fi = 0.1, fc = 0.1, and L = 100,000 years
N = 20 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.1 × 0.1 × 100,000 = 20,000 (there's quite a few civilizations, although the closest one would still be about 1500 light years away).

So we are not alone if the illusive deities of chaos and luck are not mean to us

^Now THAT is fascinating as hell...

(September 18, 2010 at 8:35 pm)Ashendant Wrote: So we are not alone if the illusive deities of chaos and luck are not mean to us

Which proves once again that Math is awesome.

(September 18, 2010 at 8:44 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote:

(September 18, 2010 at 8:35 pm)Ashendant Wrote: So we are not alone if the illusive deities of chaos and luck are not mean to us

Which proves once again that Math is awesome.

Yes it is no matter how much i despise it

Also mind that is for communicative civilizations, not planets with life or planets with civilizations that can't communicate

(September 18, 2010 at 5:18 pm)blood_pardon Wrote: Until the moment in history when abiogenesis isn't a complete failure please refrain from using it as explanation for the origin of life.

We have also failed to reproduce Nuclear fusion in the laboratory. So by your standards it's not true.

Yet every star in the sky proves that it happens.

Just because we have haven't been able to do it ourselves yet doesn't mean it's inapplicable.

(September 18, 2010 at 8:52 pm)Ashendant Wrote: Yes it is no matter how much i despise it

Also mind that is for communicative civilizations, not planets with life or planets with civilizations that can't communicate

It does also ignore the difference in time in which these civilizations formed. Humankind came into its technological advancement in a geologic blink of an eye due to factors that we're still coming to understand. Even the civilizations that can communicate may or may not be able to communicate necessarily with us in any realistic fashion - which is to say that perhaps due to differing telecommunications technology or even just a wildly different method of direct communication.
There could be life on every other planet out there but those differences alone would make communication extremely difficult.

For example, a race of humanlike aliens (think star trek) may have come into existance on a planet similar to ours. In any important respect, they're very similar to us (perhaps they're Vulcans), and they live in a solar system within a mere 50 light years from our planet, but perhaps they did their search for life outside their 150,000 years ago, but nowadays they're barely the same species and become something completely different due to the progress of their civilization. Or perhaps they didn't accept Surak's teachings and they blew themselves to kingdom come.

It's really difficult in this respect to even guess as to what might be out there when we ourselves are still just starting to understand the universe when just a mere 100 years ago, most of the technology we take for granted (and are using for these searches) were still very new, let alone a thousand, a million, or even a billion years ago over the course of the 13.7 billion years of the universe's current existance.

An entire civilization could have lived and died in orbit around one of the three stars in the Alpha Centari system over the course of millions of years and could even still be alive in a form incomprehensible to us or they simply moved out of their solar system into a universe of their own design and we may absolutely never know about it. The implications are astounding.