Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: kstu
Originally posted by: thepd7
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: thepd7
I am just waiting for the next time a fully functional robot spontaneously forms (sorry, evolves) out of a bag of bolts, circuit boards, and wires (batteries would have to evolve on their own naturally).
Might take a few billion years but I really think it's gonna happen!
(Hoping this is sarcasm, but in the event it's not: )
You don't really have any idea how it works, do you?
Besides, you forgot to use the "tornado + junkyard = 747 jet" BS example which has a similar lack of truth.
To address HeroOfPellinor's post below this one:
For those who want my evolution bit,
it's in this old thread, toward the bottom of the page. Enjoy. (Google was used to find the volume of Earth's oceans, and the wattage per square meter influx of energy from the sun. That was it.)
Summarized: Gradual change among billions upon billions of organisms over immense expanses of time.
Dead serious. People say that humans evolved from..which evolved from...eventually you get primordial sludge, that life evolved from the building blocks of life.
I am saying that a robot will evolve from the building blocks of a robot in a few billion years. How is that not the same?
Can you really not see the difference between living organisms and inanimate objects?
indeed... i think his argument is that the difference between living organisms and inanimate objects would dictate abiogenesis statistically impossible.
Since evolution depends on abiogensis at its core beginnings... a lack of one would seriously negate the other.
while scientists may have what appears to be evidence of Evolution... they have nothing on abiogenesis... which creates an entirely different problem.
the only problem with abiogenesis is that it probably left no footprints for us to study. I mean, how else could we?
I need to mix in this post too:
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: kstu
Originally posted by: thepd7
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: thepd7
I am just waiting for the next time a fully functional robot spontaneously forms (sorry, evolves) out of a bag of bolts, circuit boards, and wires (batteries would have to evolve on their own naturally).
Might take a few billion years but I really think it's gonna happen!
(Hoping this is sarcasm, but in the event it's not: )
You don't really have any idea how it works, do you?
Besides, you forgot to use the "tornado + junkyard = 747 jet" BS example which has a similar lack of truth.
To address HeroOfPellinor's post below this one:
For those who want my evolution bit,
it's in this old thread, toward the bottom of the page. Enjoy. (Google was used to find the volume of Earth's oceans, and the wattage per square meter influx of energy from the sun. That was it.)
Summarized: Gradual change among billions upon billions of organisms over immense expanses of time.
Dead serious. People say that humans evolved from..which evolved from...eventually you get primordial sludge, that life evolved from the building blocks of life.
I am saying that a robot will evolve from the building blocks of a robot in a few billion years. How is that not the same?
Can you really not see the difference between living organisms and inanimate objects?
I'm confused. So there was a big bang. And all these planets went shooting out. And on our one particular planet there was also a living organism that hung on for the ride? And then later evolved into us?
Perfectly logical.
And scientific.
(my reply is all from my head, no google or wiki involved, or anything else but my own thoughts)
okay, now to properly begin my reply.
first off, nothing was alive on the planet when it was hurtling through space after said first explosion, because the planet didn't exist. Nor did our star. First, after the universe settled down a bit and some of the first formations of massive nuclear bodies were formed, and started converting hydrogen and helium into all the other elements (in random formations at such high velocity and heat that it was possible). In the wake of these bodies (very short lived iirc from the material I have looked at quite a while ago), new bodies, ordinary stars began forming. Well disks of material began orbiting these new stars, and started collecting in rings and each ring collected into its own body. Over time, gravity and collisions would shape these bodies. One such body, to be later named Earth, was a molten and miserable place, absolutely void of water, and more importantly, life. Icy comets and asteroids (at this point, many many many times the number of asteroids and comets than currently exist now, since the solar system was in its infancy and it was rich with material). Well, they struck Earth and essentially filled it with water.
Now, the planet has a necessary ingredient. In the water life would erupt, at what point no one knows due to a lack of a footprint in time. As we know, all life is, is a collection of different elements combined in different amounts and interacting with each other in different ways. Well, at some point, in the water, different elements began pairing together and interacting with each other and the water itself, until it became an entity all its own. This entity was merely existed because it was necessary. Well, what likely took place was this singular organism began devouring other elements, and it likely split (probably a random occurrence, maybe a current ripped it apart), but either way there was now two of it, and maybe they were completely different from the original thing, who knows. This would likely continue, except now the theory of evolution can be introduced: maybe when one of the organisms began simply growing larger, or maybe when it split, it stayed together (multiple cells together). This process may have continued or not for a very lengthy period of time before anything visible sprung about. You may not even consider this life. They may not have fed yet, consumed any energy, or even had the random strings of elements we call DNA, RNA or anything comparable. But regardless, the chain of events started.
This may be completely off from the accepted theories, who knows. Everything is pure speculation without a footprint of the first stages of life. But THAT is exactly why scientists are looking on other planets and at the most extreme environments, seeing if we can find evidence of a similar beginning elsewhere. They likely believe life will begin in essentially the same manner everywhere; my theory is, life will exist in other places, but maybe in different shapes altogether to compensate for their environment, intellect unknown, and maybe water isn't even involved... maybe another liquid is.
my point that I want to make:
you look at this as being foolish, obviously. But please, tell me how the bible says LIFE began. Oh wait, they just start on Earth. Hmm, do they ever introduce where the hell this deity came from? Another interesting thing, is all religions share the same exact elements of worship, same exact basic plots. Change the names and specific events, and you got the different religions. Did you know how much in common the modern religions have with the Egyptians and their Sun god?
It's comical that creationists argue that evolution is wrong, and that life couldn't have spontaneously began out of nowhere, and that the big bang could not have happened in a random event.. but yet they claim no beginning to the almighty himself. Hmm, I wonder what it's like coming to life from nothing, and being alive before anything even exists, and then getting the idea to create something like the Universe.
Both theories of our origin are illogical since far enough back, there are still a lack of answers to the many questions presented.. however one is more illogical than the other. I think I know which one.
Ever since society was created from tribal origins, and we began to be able to think for ourselves, we wrote our downfall. Religion was a thinking-mans answer to the riddle of life, why to exist? When the answer which was presented to him through nature was completely ignored: for no reason except to continue to live. There is no greater purpose, no reason for morality, nothing but to eat and die. Since any species has the want to live, we eat, and since we want more life, we breed. Well, eventually life has to end and you die, but there is a point: return your elemental self back to the ground to provide nutrients for other life.
Life's purpose is life. Religion is merely a fictional answer to those who lack the understanding of a life without meaning other than how I described it. How is it so hard to believe that? Because what about all the other creatures that are there? Surely all of them need not exist unless they simply evolved from other lifeforms. We would only need a few specific food chains to support our life.
okay, I'm bored now and have other things to do, including homework. I'm sure my point reads loud and clear.
Facebook
Twitter