Alien Life? You better hope God exists!

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I have evidence for God. Sorry.

No you don't. Not a shred.

 

[sealybobo]

Black holes may be necessary or the key to our universe. Everything you think you know is challenged. For years Einstein denied black holes exist. How do we know so much about them? Does boss doubt black holes exist?

 

[sealybobo]

What is gravity? Not what are it’s effects but what is it? Is it a force? I bet boss doesn’t believe this science. If he accepts this why not all the evidence for evolution?

 

[sealybobo]

I have evidence for God. Sorry.

No you don't. Not a shred.

I’m curious how he will talk his way out of this one

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I have evidence for God. Sorry.

No you don't. Not a shred.

I’m curious how he will talk his way out of this one

Same way he always does: "It's evidence to me!"

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If he accepts this why not all the evidence for evolution?

That's easy. The climate and evolution deniers deny the science because its conclusions dont align with their superstitions, politics, fetishes, and neuroses. Period.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

I’m curious how he will talk his way out of this one

that's how posting with bossy becomes a nauseating experience ... a righteous crusader.

 

[edthecynic]

Quantities can change at different rates, again you are trying to use semantics on scientific language which allows only one meaning for the words used and that meaning corresponds to specific mathematical processes, therefore "quantity" and "rate" are NOT interchangeable.

Never decrease has already been explained to you, if the entropy of a closed system is zero then the entropy of the system is not decreasing.

The ONLY thing entropy, S, cannot be is negative , it can be positive or zero. I already gave you an example of a closed system with an entropy of zero, any stable atom.

The quantity of entropy in your formula is S.

S is simply the symbol for entropy. Delta S is the change in entropy, it can be a positive number or zero. It cannot be negative.

 

[edthecynic]

Never decrease has already been explained to you, if the entropy of a closed system is zero then the entropy of the system is not decreasing.

IF entropy equals zero it doesn't exist and that defies physics since entropy exists.

The rate of increase can be zero but there is still entropy. Entropy never decreases.

If entropy equals zero, it doesn't increase.
So what is the entropy of a stable atom?????

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Never decrease has already been explained to you, if the entropy of a closed system is zero then the entropy of the system is not decreasing.

IF entropy equals zero it doesn't exist and that defies physics since entropy exists.

The rate of increase can be zero but there is still entropy. Entropy never decreases.

If entropy equals zero, it doesn't increase.
So what is the entropy of a stable atom?????

That's , like, a koan.

 

[edthecynic]

Never decrease has already been explained to you, if the entropy of a closed system is zero then the entropy of the system is not decreasing.

IF entropy equals zero it doesn't exist and that defies physics since entropy exists.

The rate of increase can be zero but there is still entropy. Entropy never decreases.

I have been following this debate and find it interesting. What I have found is comments that the Third Law says a crystal at absolute zero would have zero entropy, but that seems to be in dispute also.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-zero-entropy

“Thermodynamics is a funny subject. The first time you go through it, you don't understand it at all. The second time you go through it, you think you understand it, except for one or two small points. The third time you go through it, you know you don't understand it, but by that time you are so used to it, it doesn't bother you anymore.”
— Arnold Sommerfeld, when asked why he had never written a book on the subject (c.1950)

 

[RWS]

It’s all on YouTube how scientists think it might have happened and if any of them are disproven they are thrown out. Nothing definitive as evolution but they see ancient dna can stow away in rocks. Ass water presto in a relitively short time.

And they explain life started when you and I could not have survived.

There’s enough we know there’s no good reason why our theories aren’t possible. Your god did it hypothesis leaves us with more questions than answers

There is nothing on YouTube explaining how abiogenesis is a fact. Sorry!

You obviously don't understand how the scientific method works. Theories are not true until proven invalid. If that's the case, then god created everything and that is true because you've not proved it invalid... see how that works?

DNA is not an element. DNA is the genetic coding of something already living. You cannot explain the origin of life by pointing to something that life created as your point of origin. That's just boneheaded stupidity.

Ok so the answer is we don’t know not god must have done it.

How did he do it? Evolution or poof?

Let's be clear... Whether you believe in a god or a universe without god, something poofed life into existence because it's here. Evolution is the evolving of already existing life, it does not explain the ORIGIN of life. How many times does this point have to be made to penetrate your thick head?

Fundamentally, at some point... inorganic material "poofed" into life. You apparently believe in some kind of mystical cosmic magic you can't explain and I believe in spiritual nature. Neither of us can disprove the other but the fact remains, at some point, on some level, life "poofed" into existence.

Fundamentally, at some point, some elements combined to form molecules that have different properties than their individual atoms. And those molecules attracted more elements and molecules based on new and newer properties, to form even more complex molecules. Eventually that molecule may separate due to instability when it gets to a certain size/length. And then starts the process over again, this time 2x.

This is something that should happen by pure chance, given how many atoms there are on the Earth and the infinite combinations provided. We all know how certain atoms naturally combine to form more complex molecules with different properties, like water. It does not need to happen everywhere spontaneously. Just in one spot with one teeny tiny molecule that will split and replicate itself again, and then split again, etc... This may be happening constantly to this day. As it spreads, it will create a need for more atomic resources as it uses the neighboring ones. When the resources start to dwindle, mutations in some of these molecules will allow one of them to start using more diverse resources to help them continue to combine and replicate. And so on, and so on, and so on. Until we get to a very complex molecule like RNA/DNA. This is evolution and natural selection.

Whether you consider replicating molecules to be "life", is up to you and your beliefs. If you do, then it should happen naturally given enough opportunity, and we are already making great strides on replicating the process. And AI will eventually create a brand new version of life in that sense. If you don't consider replicating molecules as life, then you have a definition of life that is based on something else, possibly more supernatural. If so, what is your prerequisite for the definition of "life"?

Short Sharp Science: Biologists create self-replicating RNA molecule

 

[Boss]

Weird you can’t get behind multiverse because there’s no evidence outside your mind but you can god

I have evidence for God. Sorry.

You do? What is it?

Many blessings. Strength to persevere. Inspiration. Comfort and peace of mind.

What about the people who don’t have those things? Are they evidence god doesn’t exist?

See boss, if your first answer is bad, ya got no evidence.

Nova is doing a special on black holes. You may want to watch and see there are more possibilities than god did it. God explains nothing

You're applying faulty logic. If I witness a murder it doesn't matter that billions of other people did not witness the murder. The evidence is that I witnessed the murder.

I completely agree, "god did it" is a declarative statement with zero explanatory value. So why does that seem to bother you so much? Declarative statements with no explanatory value cannot challenge or compete with science.

 

[Boss]

I have evidence for God. Sorry.

No you don't. Not a shred.

I’m curious how he will talk his way out of this one

Same way he always does: "It's evidence to me!"

Well that's exactly it. I never claimed I had evidence you would accept. I said that I have evidence for God, and I do. It's all the evidence I need and it doesn't matter to me that you don't accept it.

 

[Boss]

Never decrease has already been explained to you, if the entropy of a closed system is zero then the entropy of the system is not decreasing.

IF entropy equals zero it doesn't exist and that defies physics since entropy exists.

The rate of increase can be zero but there is still entropy. Entropy never decreases.

If entropy equals zero, it doesn't increase.
So what is the entropy of a stable atom?????

We don't know the answer because Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. If you've found a way to measure nature's most fundamental elements, congratulations... that's the second Nobel Prize you've nailed down in this thread. We'll set it beside your Nobel Prize for proving the existence of God.

I'm going to again point out, you keep making erroneous and incredibly ridiculous statements that you cannot support but you periodically post a source that totally contradicts what you're saying and pretend you've backed your argument. I don't know if it's because you are too dumb to understand the topic or you think other people are too dumb to realize how full of shit you are. Either way, it is getting really boring to me.

 

[hobelim]

Well that's exactly it. I never claimed I had evidence you would accept. I said that I have evidence for God, and I do. It's all the evidence I need and it doesn't matter to me that you don't accept it.

If you claimed to have stumbled on a treasure and became wealthy how else is someone supposed to believe you if you can't show them the money?

Why would you believe you if you couldn't?

 

[Boss]

Fundamentally, at some point, some elements combined to form molecules that have different properties than their individual atoms. And those molecules attracted more elements and molecules based on new and newer properties, to form even more complex molecules. Eventually that molecule may separate due to instability when it gets to a certain size/length. And then starts the process over again, this time 2x.

This is something that should happen by pure chance, given how many atoms there are on the Earth and the infinite combinations provided. We all know how certain atoms naturally combine to form more complex molecules with different properties, like water. It does not need to happen everywhere spontaneously. Just in one spot with one teeny tiny molecule that will split and replicate itself again, and then split again, etc... This may be happening constantly to this day. As it spreads, it will create a need for more atomic resources as it uses the neighboring ones. When the resources start to dwindle, mutations in some of these molecules will allow one of them to start using more diverse resources to help them continue to combine and replicate. And so on, and so on, and so on. Until we get to a very complex molecule like RNA/DNA. This is evolution and natural selection.

Whether you consider replicating molecules to be "life", is up to you and your beliefs. If you do, then it should happen naturally given enough opportunity, and we are already making great strides on replicating the process. And AI will eventually create a brand new version of life in that sense. If you don't consider replicating molecules as life, then you have a definition of life that is based on something else, possibly more supernatural. If so, what is your prerequisite for the definition of "life"?

Short Sharp Science: Biologists create self-replicating RNA molecule

This is a theory of "spontaneous generation" and it has been debunked for more than a century. It is precisely what scientists used to believe before we discovered RNA/DNA.

The fact remains, science has never originated life from inorganic materials. It is a telling and fascinating stretch that you are going to propose AI in this argument, as if that is a man-made creation of life. It speaks to how pathetically desperate your failure of an argument has become. AI is not a living organism. Sorry cyborgs!

 

[Boss]

Well that's exactly it. I never claimed I had evidence you would accept. I said that I have evidence for God, and I do. It's all the evidence I need and it doesn't matter to me that you don't accept it.

If you claimed to have stumbled on a treasure and became wealthy how else is someone supposed to believe you if you can't show them the money?

Why would you believe you if you couldn't?

If I don't show them does that mean I didn't?

Here's the deal... I don't care if you don't believe me! I'm not here to convince you of MY evidence. If you don't believe I have evidence, that's fine, it doesn't bother me. I don't need to convince you of my evidence to find value in it for myself.

 

[hobelim]

Well that's exactly it. I never claimed I had evidence you would accept. I said that I have evidence for God, and I do. It's all the evidence I need and it doesn't matter to me that you don't accept it.

If you claimed to have stumbled on a treasure and became wealthy how else is someone supposed to believe you if you can't show them the money?

Why would you believe you if you couldn't?

If I don't show them does that mean I didn't?

Here's the deal... I don't care if you don't believe me! I'm not here to convince you of MY evidence. If you don't believe I have evidence, that's fine, it doesn't bother me. I don't need to convince you of my evidence to find value in it for myself.

Of course you are right. some people can't see whats in front of their nose.

Still, if you had hold of a real connection to what you call spiritual energy IT would open their eyes, and then they would have something to believe.

 

[edthecynic]

So what is the entropy of a stable atom?????

We don't know the answer because Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

You see, you just throw out concepts you understand nothing about trying to sound authoritative when you pontificate.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle regarding atoms says the more accurately you know the position of an electron, the less accurately you know its direction. It has NOTHING to do with entropy.
Try to lie again.