they are going to learn.
Hopefully before it's to late.
Just find me one exoplanet:
"Somewhere, at some point in the history of our Universe, life arose. We’re evidence of that here on Earth, but many BIG puzzles remain."
"What do planets outside our solar system, or exoplanets, look like? A variety of possibilities are shown in this illustration. Scientists discovered the first exoplanets in the 1990s. As of 2024, the tally stands at over 5,000 confirmed exoplanets. None are known to be inhabited, but a few raise tantalizing possibilities: largely among the Earth-sized planets, but not so much among the larger ones."
("Just find me an exoplanet:
orbiting a star like ours,
with oceans,
fresh water,
a strong magnetic field,
plate tectonics,
and an atmosphere.
GOOD LUCK.")
"Key Takeaways
Ever since we recognized that there are other planets, stars, star systems, and galaxies out there in the Universe, it’s been inevitable that we’ve wondered about the biggest question of all: “Are we alone?” Although life certainly exists here on Earth, despite all of our accomplishments in exploring and understanding the Universe, we have yet to find our first surefire signature of life beyond Earth. Did life originate on Earth, or elsewhere in space before coming to Earth? Is life common, uncommon, or exceedingly rare? And are there any other inhabited planets nearby? These questions, plus others, are among modern science’s loftiest goals."
(I have already answered a lot of those.
Refer back to the intro.)
"...without a second example of life, there are many burning questions that remain unanswered. Here are some of the biggest ones."
"The panspermia hypothesis notes that on any world where life arises, impacts will occur, potentially kicking that life up and out of its home world, where it can seed new life on potentially habitable worlds both nearby and also far away in both space and time. It is possible that Earth life originated elsewhere, and also possible that Earth life has stowed away and gave rise to living worlds elsewhere as well."
(It does absolutely nothing
to solve the problem of:
"Where did life come from?"
It just moves the problem
"over there somewhere".
Nor does it solve the question of
the source
of the information
that life requires.
And if you honestly think
microbes could survive
an asteroid collision with the earth
and then somehow
give rise to intelligent life?
I got some beach front property
in Arizona I'd like to sell ya.
Not to mention:
WHERE DOES IT GET
IT'S INFORMATION WE KNOW
IT NEEDS FROM?
Here is an example
of what they are trying to sell you in a nutshell:
"In Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,
well-known British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins,
Oxford University’s
Professor for Public Understanding of Science
from 1995 to 2008,
said concerning the possibility of intelligent design:
"It could be that at
some earlier time,
somewhere in the Universe,
a civilization evolved by,
probably,
some kind of Darwinian means,
(Where did the information come from?)
to a very, very high level of technology,
and designed a form of life
that they seeded onto,
perhaps,
this planet.
Now that is a possibility,
and an intriguing possibility.
And I suppose it’s possible
that you might find evidence for that,
if you look at the details
of our chemistry,
molecular biology,
you might find
a signature of some kind of designer.
(You most certianly do,
it's in the INFORMATION
contained in our genetic code.)
And that designer
could well be
a higher intelligence
from elsewhere in the Universe.
(Stein and Miller, 2008)."
(Outside it actually.
And permeates through it as well.
So the same people telling you an
asteriod impact destroyed most of the life on the earth,
is exactly
what is capable of bringing life to the earth?
And if so, where did it get its information from?
Youre gonna get sick of hearing it.
It aint for you
its for them.)
"One can imagine
a number of possibilities
for how Earth life arose."
(Just because some
"high-minded scientist"
can IMAGINE IT?
Don't make it so.)
"Life originated on Earth once,
and has survived ever since to the present day."
(Absolute falsehood #1
and the Big Bloom discredits that,
Reference:
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
Dangerous False Prophet Alert #3
The people are on the defensive these days
and for obvious reasons.
Maybe they should take their own advice:
"YOU CANT UNDERSTAND THE WORLD
BY BEING AN EXTREMEIST."
THIS is what the fossil record shows:
And its not just the
Cambrian explosion,
its the "Big Bloom"
"There were two similar explosions in the evolution of land plants: after a cryptic history beginning about 450 million years ago, land plants underwent a uniquely rapid adaptive radiation during the Devonian period, about 400 million years ago. Furthermore, angiosperms (flowering plants) originated and rapidly diversified during the Cretaceous period.
(Big Bloom")
and the mammalian radiation as well.
"Perhaps the most familiar example of an evolutionary radiation is that of placental mammals immediately after the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous, about 66 million years ago. At that time, the placental mammals were mostly small, insect-eating animals similar in size and shape to modern shrews. By the Eocene (58–37 million years ago), they had evolved into such diverse forms as bats, whales, and horses.
Other familiar radiations include the Avalon Explosion, the Cambrian Explosion, the Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event, the Carboniferous-Earliest Permian Biodiversification Event, the Mesozoic–Cenozoic Radiation, the radiation of land plants after their colonisation of land, the Cretaceous radiation of angiosperms, and the diversification of insects, a radiation that has continued almost unabated since the Devonian, 400 million years ago."
These all happened
very abruptly
(by geologic standards)
and with no fossil record
leading up to them.
So how is this:
not an extremist position?"
IT"S NOT EVEN WITHIN THE RANGE
OF BEING POSSIBLE
LIKE IT IS BEING PRESENTED
IN THIS ARTICLE.
Ethan Seigel?
Your credibility is destroyed
and we are not even through
the first paragraph.
NEXT!)
"Life originated on Earth many times over, and all of those instances/lineages except one went extinct at various points, leaving only evidence from the one surviving thread for us to observe."
"Life originated elsewhere in the Universe, either in interplanetary/interstellar space or on an entirely different world, and came to Earth long ago, “seeding” our planet with life that happened to find conditions under which it could survive and thrive."
(Doesn't answer the question of how did life form there
and if life there brought it to earth
and all living things here have information encoded in their DNA,
then where did the life originating elsewhere
get its encoded information from?
Lets just see how many times Mr Seigel brings up the fact
that all life we have ever seen has had encoded information in it.
INFORMATION IS ALWAYS A SIGN
OF AN INTELLECT.
IT IS ORDERED, SEQUENCED
AND REQUIRES PRE PLANNING.
INFORMATION IS THE OPPOSITE OF RANDOMNESS.)
"All of these are within the realm of possibility, of course,"
(NO, AS DEMONSTRATED ABOVE
THEY MOST CERTIANLY NOT:
"within the realm of possibility"
Creditability gap just widened Ethan.)
"...as the only evidence we have is the presence and record of life on Earth encoded within our own planet, and the lack of signs of life, either related to or independent of Earth-life, elsewhere within our Solar System and our Universe. Mars, the Moon, Venus, plus moons like Titan, Triton, Ganymede, Europa, Enceladus, as well as dwarf planets like Eris, Pluto, and Ceres are all candidate worlds for either past or present life,
(Where is the information that is needed for life
going to come from Ethan?)
"...but thus far no compelling, incontrovertible evidence of biological activity has been found on any world other than Earth."
(Interesting, there is an ancient text
that talks about life only being on this planet.)
YOU WILL NEVER EVER HAVE LIFE.)
"But in order for life to actually emerge, we need more than even these complex molecules. We need something that can metabolize a source of energy (e.g., from nutrients, from sunlight/starlight, or elsewhere from the environment) and use that energy to conduct life processes, and also that can reproduce itself and give rise to a subsequent generation of offspring. All forms of life that exist on Earth have these two things in common, including organisms like viruses that are sometimes classified as living and sometimes as non-living, depending on what criteria are used for defining life. Whether Earth-based life originated on Earth or elsewhere in the Universe is still an open question."
("in order for life to actually emerge,
we need more than even these complex molecules."
(Yeah, no kidding,
life requires information.
How many times has
he mentioned that?)
"Whether Earth-based life originated on Earth
or elsewhere in the Universe is still an open question."
(If life originated elsewhere?
And then seeded life here?
Then what was the source
of that lifes information?
And remember,
Information is always
the result of an intellect
and the exact opposite of randomness.
Always, every time ever, no exceptions.
Universal Law.
Means it requires a law-giver.
An AI once told me:
"Crystals and Mathematics
are examples of information
that occur in nature"
To which I said:
"Thanks for proving my point,
that there is an intelligence
behind nature."
Damn thing shut up
and crawled away embarrassed.
TRUTH!)
(The cult of scientism,
"Scientism is the belief that science
and the scientific method
are the best
or only way
to render truth about the world and reality."
just flat out ignores the fact
that the single most important ingredient for life
to exist, is information
and that information
is always, without exception
the result of an intellect.
True science doesn't ignore the evidence
presented right in front of it
no matter how vehemently opposed
it may be to that evidence.
The faith-based belief system of scientism does just that.
True science builds on that evidence
it doesn't ignore it or try to circumvent it.
How many times has Mr. Seigel mentioned that
the most important ingredient for life is information?
ZERO.
They are simply ignoring
the reality they don't want to admit to themselves.)
"2.) How common is life, of any type, throughout the Universe?
"One of the best analogies I ever heard concerning the question of life in the Universe is that of a lottery. Each world that forms around each star — whether it’s a planet, moon, or dwarf planet — is like a lottery ticket. All of a sudden, a huge number of questions arise.
Will life ever form, arrive at, and take hold on this world?
If life ever does arise, will it go extinct relatively quickly, or will it survive for long periods of time?
Will there be multiple independent origins of life, or just one, if life does arise?
And if that life does survive and thrive for long periods of time, what will be the most complex, differentiated, intelligent, and/or technologically advanced form of life that it becomes?"
(WHERE IS THE INFORMATION
THAT IS REQUIRED FOR LIFE
GOING TO COME FROM?
AND HOW IS IT GOING
TO EMBEDED ITSELF
IN THE LIFE FORM?)
"Even that first question, of whether life ever forms, arrives on, or takes hold on such a world, is something whose frequency we have no idea about. Here on Earth, all we know is that life came to exist on it, somehow, at some point long ago: as far back as the fossil records can take us, and possibly even earlier than that.
(That is ignoring the fact that the vast majority of life that we see on earth today came from the Cambrian explosion.
"The Cambrian explosion (also known as Cambrian radiation[1] or Cambrian diversification) is an interval of time beginning approximately 538.8 million years ago in the Cambrian period of the early Paleozoic, when a sudden radiation of complex life occurred and practically all major animal phyla started appearing in the fossil record.[2][3][4] It lasted for about 13[5][6][7] to 25[8][9] million years and resulted in the divergence of most modern metazoan phyla.[10] The event was accompanied by major diversification in other groups of organisms as well.[a]
Before early Cambrian diversification,[b] most organisms were relatively simple, composed of individual cells or small multicellular organisms, occasionally organized into colonies. As the rate of diversification subsequently accelerated, the variety of life became much more complex and began to resemble that of today.[12] Almost all present-day animal phyla appeared during this period,[13][14] including the earliest chordates.[15]"
(So it is just complete 100% horseshit
what he is trying to say here.)
"But on all other known worlds, from exoplanets to the planets, moons, and dwarf planets in our Solar System, we have no signatures of life anywhere."
(Interesting, there is an ancient text
that talks about life only being on this planet.)
(Thats a whole lot of coevolution.
"Assuming, as scientists often do, that there’s no “divine intervention” in our Universe..."
Well there is their first mistake
right there.
Matter antimatter asymmetry.
That proves there is
Divine Intervention
right there
(Look it up I get tired of creating links lol.)
There is no reason for it.
Yet it was/is.
And if it didn't exist?
No universe.
So why and how was it a thing?
Information in the DNA Molecule
same thing divine intervention,
there is no other explanation.
DNA is a "righthanded" molecule.
All the proteins it works with are left handed.
Has to be this way in order to be able to work.
Chance of that being an accident?
0%.
Divine intervention once again.
So the initial assumption of their faith-based believe system is in error and can never yield a truthful conclusion.)
"And all of the life that we know is far more advanced than a mere “metabolic replicator,” which we can synthesize (like peptide nucleic acids), instead possessing not only metabolisms and the ability to replicate/reproduce themselves, but also contain a genetic string of information that encodes the production of proteins and cell walls/membranes to separate an organism’s “insides” from the external environment."
So where is the intellect behind:
"a genetic string of information"
??????????
He has now mentioned information being needed exactly one time now albeit without mentioning that it can only be the result of an intellect, nor purposing any method by which the information arrived in the cell. Since it can not be any physical/biological/chemical or geological process that embedded the information? The means by which it got there has to exist outside the laws of nature as we now understand them, or by "supernatural" means.)
"This leaves, as a huge open question, the puzzle of how the life that exists on Earth actually first came into existence from precursor, inorganic ingredients."
(It didnt. It was designed by your creator and the information encoded in the DNA molecule proves this, as information is always the result of an intellect, wrongful premises don't end in truthful conclusions.)
"There are many hypotheses surrounding the origin of life, including origins in interstellar space, hydrothermal vent or hydrothermal field origins, a “membrane-first” origin, a “replication first” origin, a “metabolism first” origin, and a “nucleic acid first” origin, such as the RNA world hypothesis. Many different groups
working on this puzzle
favor different sets of origins,
as the evidence we’ve gathered
is only circumstantial and indirect;
(Hillbilly translation?
Thats how you know
they don't have a fucking clue.
0.
None.
NADA.
Zilch.
Why don't they have a clue?
Cause they are trying to do something
that just cant be done.
And they just cant wrap their heads around the concept
of a creator.
Gonna suck for em bad for eternity because of it.
One life giver.
One life source.
Fuck around with that?
And cataclysmic judgement
will be the end result.
Did I mention there is a seven mile wide chunk of space rock going 130,000 mph+ that's going to go within .2 AU of Mars?
If you were ever gonna rethink some shit?
Even some beliefs that have been held for a lifetime?
Nows the time.
Now is the time, come clean on this nonsense.
To many people see right throught it any more.
Just as obvious AF.)
"...we have not by any means ever synthesized something that we would classify as a living organism from solely non-biological precursor ingredients."
(BECAUSE YOU CANT!)
"Early on, shortly after the Earth first formed, life likely arose in the waters of our planet. The evidence we have that all life that’s extant today can be traced back to a universal common ancestor is very strong,
(Horseshit. Reconcile the concept of the LCUA with the cambrian and all the other explosions of biometric information (life) we have had on this earth. Good luck. LUCA is a theoretical organism and for good reason, cause its laughable these days And? as stated earlier, most of the forms of life we see today came from the Cambrian explosion, rendering this hypothesis just meaningless, seriously, its beyond ridiculous at this point.
And, once again,
lets just say the LCUA is spot on, okay
where did the information come from?)
"but many details concerning the early stages of our planet, for perhaps the first 1-to-1.5 billion years, remain largely obscure. While life arose early on, there is no evidence that Earth came into existence with life already on it, with the origin being uncertain to within 100-700 million years after our planet’s formation."
"By the time that the Earth was just 1 billion years old, or ~3.5 billion years ago, biologists are certain that life already had developed the ability to transcribe and translate information between DNA, RNA, and proteins, and those mechanisms still exist in every organism that’s descended from that long-ago epoch. "
(Awesome Ethan that is twice you have mentioned it.
(Information)
But where did it come from?
As it can not be the result of a random process
and how did it get there?
AND
"translate information between
DNA, RNA, and proteins"
You need all three
at the same time in order to work.
Its a continuum.
One without the other two?
No life.
So what's the odds
all three came into existence at the same time?
Ive seem em factored out.
Nope, not plausible.
Astronomically high would be the odds
To high to be considered
any kinda chance.
I am just so sick and tired of these people leaving out the relevant information they should be giving you, just chaps my ass to no end.)
"All forms of life that exist today, in fact, can be traced back to what’s known as LUCA: the Last Universal Common Ancestor of life."
(Complete falsehood #2.
100% WRONG.
The fossil record shows
Life developed on this earth like this:
)"When we talk about looking for life beyond Earth, people normally get one of three pictures in their heads.
They think about SETI, or the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, and the possibility of detecting a signal produced by intelligent, technologically advanced aliens that’s an unmistakable “smoking gun” signature of not only their existence and location, but of their eagerness to be contacted by us.
They think about journeying to other worlds in our Solar System, places like Mars, Venus, Titan, Triton, Enceladus, Europa, Ceres, Ganymede, Pluto, etc., and searching for either past relics of life, examples of dormant life that could be reawakened, or possibly even finding existing simple life. It wouldn’t be as remarkable as finding intelligent aliens, but it would teach us our origins are non-unique.
Or we could use future generations of telescopes and observatories to build up a suite of evidence supporting the case that a particular exoplanet is actually an inhabited world: containing biosignature molecules and exhibiting the types of changes over time that belie something more than geological, atmospheric, or other inorganic processes that could mimic one particular signature we more typically associate with life."
(WHAT INTELLECT WOULD BE RESPONSIABLE
FOR THE INFORMATION
THOSE LIFE FORMS WOULD NEED?)
of the universe didnt happen by committee.
One creator.
One owner of the life force.
This is the only place he ever said he put life.
Deal with it
or perish eternally.
)(Every planet could be earth like,
have the right ingredients
and right conditions
and if you don't have information
which requires an intellect, you aint got squat.)
"5.) Are we actually unique, and alone, as a living planet in the Universe?"
(Yes.
Life here wasnt an accident
and the genetic code
in the DNA gives that away.
Or?
if you prefer:
YES
as it is what the evidence says
until proven definitely otherwise.)
"Nearly every working scientist
in the fields of
astronomy,
astrophysics,
biology,
and astrobiology
will tell you that the possibility
that we truly are alone
is a very slim one."
(Well I'll tell you something
that is even
a slimmer possibility
than that
and that is this:
the probability
that our universe should exist
in the manner
that we know it does.
And?
Of the fields of:
"astronomy,
astrophysics,
biology,
and astrobiology"
Only one of those fields actually
studies life that exist.
Biology
and they have conceded
(at least privately to Stephen C Meyers)
That no
physical,
biological,
chemical,
or geological process
produces enough new information
to generate new life forms.
Astronomers
Astrophysics,
Astrobiologist,
Particle physicist
or cosmologist
wouldnt let a biologist
tell them whats what
in their respective fields of study,
so why in the world listen to:
astronomers
astrophysics,
astrobiologist,
particle physicist
or cosmologist
talk about life
anywhere else
when the people who study it
the only place we know it exist
have already issued
their conclusions?
I don't go to the plumber
to get a haircut
if you catch my drift
and you shouldn't either.
These people are
obviously pushing an agenda.
You can tell so by what is
DELIBERTLY
left out.
There just aint no other way around it.)
"There are many reasons to believe that this is true: in every way that we know how to look at the Universe, there is nothing about Earth, the Solar System, or the galaxy and our place in it that appears to be special and unique. There are no special conditions or properties that we are known to possess, except for the fact that Earth is a living world: the only one known so far."
(That right there,
being as absolutely untrue as it is
infuriated me enough
to write what I am writing today.
Ethan Seigel knows better than that,
Ive read his stuff long enough.
The only thing I can think is
he was forced to write what he was
or it was edited by AI after the fact.
Cause it just does not sound like him.
Our solar system is an outlier,
find me another one with not one but two
gas giants in its outer reaches.
(I think they have found one so far.)
I just did a thing not that long ago
about how our Galaxy is an outlier
Thursday, July 10, 2025
Even our galaxy is an outlier.
Astronomy.com 7/04/25
Big Think 12/21/2017.
So don't go telling me
about how small of a chance it is
that we are alone
in something that
"Theoretically"
shouldn't even be here
to begin with.
These people got absolutely no answers for nothing,
and meanwhile
there is a book being proven true right in front of you
and fuckin Mount Everest
doin 150,000 MPH
(by the time it gets there)
within .2 AU of Mars.
As stated in the beginning:
"Just find me an exoplanet:
orbiting a star like ours,
with oceans,
fresh water,
a strong magnetic field,
plate tectonics,
and an atmosphere
and life.
Good luck,
aint gonna happen.
"But that only teaches us we should suspect that we aren’t alone; it doesn’t allow us to conclude that we have company."
(Amen!)
"If you woke up tomorrow and discovered that everyone around you was dead — everyone in your house, everyone on your street, everyone in your city, etc. — what would it take to convince you that you weren’t the last living human on Earth? I would argue that you’d need to find a second example of a living person: if there’s even one other, there are likely many more. But until you found that second example, you’d have to worry whether you were truly remarkable, and unique, as the last human on Earth. By the same token, we’d need a second example of life in the Universe to know, for certain, that it wasn’t just us."
(What would be the source
of the information they need
and how did it get imputed?)
"If the 20th century taught us what the Universe looked like, the 21st should be the century that sees humanity answer this, and many other, of the biggest questions of all concerning life in the Universe.
The only question is
whether we’ll invest in it enough
to actually figure out
the answers for certain,
or whether we’ll be left speculating like all prior generations of humans who’ve pondered the great cosmic unknowns."
Ethan my brother?
I love ya
but that question
has already been answered.
to Its Lowest Level in Decades
NYT 5/22/25
