The big question about life on other planets: 1000000000000000000000 planets in the universe

[Frannie]

You always have to ask... Where did god come from?

For human mythology and religion I argue that our gods were originally extraterrestrial. Later on they were just made up to suit the needs of the rulers.

What one needs to ask is where are we taking life to in the future. There are billions of planets that are dead but perfectly suited for life. The moment we find one and open the door we are God.

So look ahead instead of to the dead past

I definitely agree with that.

But the underlying factor that keeps me posting, is people believing in a false god, and potentially getting us all killed in a religious war, before we can realize our potential with humanity.

We may become extinct before we realize our potential.

That is the reason we must branch out just as we branched out on the Earth once. It is possible that we are just a branch of those who came before us who we do not understand and as such refer to as God.

 

[RWS]

The real gods were the Sumerian Anunnaki.

All other religions are based on them.

 

[FA_Q2]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

Life is generally defined as having reproduction, growth, response to stimuli, adaptation to environment, etc.
A prototype life could first contain reproduction without the other attributes, and then gain the attributes one at a time.
For example pre-life could start out with DNA as a very short strand of a just a few nucleotides that does nothing but reproduce.

.

Not likely. DNA, even in its simplest form, requires quite a bit of complexity to reproduce. Further, reproduction does not make life on its own - stars technically reproduce. They explode and spread material through the universe that recombines into other stars and planets. What makes life different is reproduction that is subject to natural selection.

Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
"Times have changed, and several decades of experimental work have convinced us that DNA synthesis and replication actually require a plethora of proteins.4 We are reasonably sure now that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared late in early life history, and that DNA originated from RNA in an RNA/protein world."

Long and rather complex read but that statement in the summery pretty much says it all. DNA is unlikely to be where life originated but is such an effective method of natural selection that it essentially took over completely.

 

[FA_Q2]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

All current known life has DNA.

That does not mean that all life has DNA. It is unlikely that is the case.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Not likely. DNA, even in its simplest form, requires quite a bit of complexity to reproduce.

Right, he is talking about something that was'nt DNA yet. Because it wasn't the full four base nucleotides, or even any of them. And DNA and RNA are not the only self replicating proteins. So what other basis do you have for rejecting this out of hand?

I like the idea you talk about, though: life and DNA forming separately, then DNA dominating the path forward and "hijacking" life.

But still, that summary in way says what you claim it says. It only talks about the complexity now. Your leap there is essentially the specious argument regarding "irreducible complexity".

 

[Frannie]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

Life is generally defined as having reproduction, growth, response to stimuli, adaptation to environment, etc.
A prototype life could first contain reproduction without the other attributes, and then gain the attributes one at a time.
For example pre-life could start out with DNA as a very short strand of a just a few nucleotides that does nothing but reproduce.

.

Not likely. DNA, even in its simplest form, requires quite a bit of complexity to reproduce. Further, reproduction does not make life on its own - stars technically reproduce. They explode and spread material through the universe that recombines into other stars and planets. What makes life different is reproduction that is subject to natural selection.

Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
"Times have changed, and several decades of experimental work have convinced us that DNA synthesis and replication actually require a plethora of proteins.4 We are reasonably sure now that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared late in early life history, and that DNA originated from RNA in an RNA/protein world."

Long and rather complex read but that statement in the summery pretty much says it all. DNA is unlikely to be where life originated but is such an effective method of natural selection that it essentially took over completely.

There is no origin of DNA to be read, wake up.

DNA is not just proteins, it is proteins orchestrated into the most complicated code known. All the computer codes on Earth pale in complexity to DNA, but oddly all computer codes and all computers and supercomputers are the result of the DNA code. The likelihood that even the simplest lifeform made of code came form nothing is not calculatable as it is null.

But you read about the origin of DNA and that makes it real.

Have you seen the page on the Chupacabra

Chupacabra

 

[Frannie]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

All current known life has DNA.

That does not mean that all life has DNA. It is unlikely that is the case.

Quite possibly true, however if the aliens at area 51 have a head 2 eyes 2 arms and 2 legs they also have DNA and we are related. This may be the real secret as it seriously upsets the belief that we came from an Earth pond.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

DNA is not just proteins, it is proteins orchestrated into the most complicated code known.

So what? Natural selection can't produce this>? According to what... your gut feeling?

 

[RWS]

They should based on my theories. That's the minimum needed for brain growth via evolution. When we meet an alien, that has the technology to get here, it should be humanoid form. That's how evolution would work.

That's to Frannie BTW

But it still will just show that it also evolved elsewhere. No god needed.

 

[RWS]

A mucous blob is not going to roll out of a spaceship. They need dexterity and building and survival skills. And obviously extreme intelligence.

And evolution would dictate that they have a humanoid form.

 

[FA_Q2]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

Life is generally defined as having reproduction, growth, response to stimuli, adaptation to environment, etc.
A prototype life could first contain reproduction without the other attributes, and then gain the attributes one at a time.
For example pre-life could start out with DNA as a very short strand of a just a few nucleotides that does nothing but reproduce.

.

Not likely. DNA, even in its simplest form, requires quite a bit of complexity to reproduce. Further, reproduction does not make life on its own - stars technically reproduce. They explode and spread material through the universe that recombines into other stars and planets. What makes life different is reproduction that is subject to natural selection.

Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
"Times have changed, and several decades of experimental work have convinced us that DNA synthesis and replication actually require a plethora of proteins.4 We are reasonably sure now that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared late in early life history, and that DNA originated from RNA in an RNA/protein world."

Long and rather complex read but that statement in the summery pretty much says it all. DNA is unlikely to be where life originated but is such an effective method of natural selection that it essentially took over completely.

There is no origin of DNA to be read, wake up.

DNA is not just proteins, it is proteins orchestrated into the most complicated code known. All the computer codes on Earth pale in complexity to DNA, but oddly all computer codes and all computers and supercomputers are the result of the DNA code. The likelihood that even the simplest lifeform made of code came form nothing is not calculatable as it is null.

Hence why DNA is not the starting point.

But you read about the origin of DNA and that makes it real.

Have you seen the page on the Chupacabra

Chupacabra

Are you really comparing a blog post to a link from NCBI?

That really does not help your point.

 

[FA_Q2]

A mucous blob is not going to roll out of a spaceship. They need dexterity and building and survival skills. And obviously extreme intelligence.

And evolution would dictate that they have a humanoid form.

That is a rather silly assertion. What makes you think that the only body form that is dexterous and can be intelligent is the one we currently occupy? That is false with even a modicum of thought. The form that a particular intelligent life is going to take if there are some out there are going to depend on the conditions of the planet it evolves on and also on the other forms of life that it is competing with.

 

[Frannie]

DNA is not just proteins, it is proteins orchestrated into the most complicated code known.

So what? Natural selection can't produce this>? According to what... your gut feeling?

No natural selection can not produce the life forms that are adapting to conditions. The only thing that comes from nothing is nothing

 

[Frannie]

DNA is not necessarily the beginning of life. Abiogenesis had to have come from a more basic beginning. Think of the process as a Markov Chain.

All life has dna

Life is generally defined as having reproduction, growth, response to stimuli, adaptation to environment, etc.
A prototype life could first contain reproduction without the other attributes, and then gain the attributes one at a time.
For example pre-life could start out with DNA as a very short strand of a just a few nucleotides that does nothing but reproduce.

.

Not likely. DNA, even in its simplest form, requires quite a bit of complexity to reproduce. Further, reproduction does not make life on its own - stars technically reproduce. They explode and spread material through the universe that recombines into other stars and planets. What makes life different is reproduction that is subject to natural selection.

Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
"Times have changed, and several decades of experimental work have convinced us that DNA synthesis and replication actually require a plethora of proteins.4 We are reasonably sure now that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared late in early life history, and that DNA originated from RNA in an RNA/protein world."

Long and rather complex read but that statement in the summery pretty much says it all. DNA is unlikely to be where life originated but is such an effective method of natural selection that it essentially took over completely.

There is no origin of DNA to be read, wake up.

DNA is not just proteins, it is proteins orchestrated into the most complicated code known. All the computer codes on Earth pale in complexity to DNA, but oddly all computer codes and all computers and supercomputers are the result of the DNA code. The likelihood that even the simplest lifeform made of code came form nothing is not calculatable as it is null.

Hence why DNA is not the starting point.

But you read about the origin of DNA and that makes it real.

Have you seen the page on the Chupacabra

Chupacabra

Are you really comparing a blog post to a link from NCBI?

That really does not help your point.

Are you really saying that proof of where DNA comes from is found on the internet? You totally missed the point, which is to be expected from a mental 8 year old who has no idea how to lead so they only follow.

DNA takes iron and instead of layering it by gravity to a low point as iron is heavy, DNA puts iron into a fluid and pumps it against gravity. Saying that DNA formed in a pond without intervention from smaller parts is like saying that nature forms pens and pencils then uses them to wrote molecular code.

This idea is 100 percent anti science on every level

 

[RWS]

A mucous blob is not going to roll out of a spaceship. They need dexterity and building and survival skills. And obviously extreme intelligence.

And evolution would dictate that they have a humanoid form.

That is a rather silly assertion. What makes you think that the only body form that is dexterous and can be intelligent is the one we currently occupy? That is false with even a modicum of thought. The form that a particular intelligent life is going to take if there are some out there are going to depend on the conditions of the planet it evolves on and also on the other forms of life that it is competing with.

It's taken a lot of thought actually.

Evolution works on limited resources. Almost all of our resources went to development of our brain. That's why we are weak physically. And why we don't have extra arms or legs or eight eyes. Resources were shifted to brain development. Once we were intelligent enough to invent medicine, we stopped evolving. Because survival of the fittest doesn't apply to us anymore.

All you need is two eyes, for 3d vision. Two ears for 3d hearing. Two legs for moving. And two arms with appendages with enough complex dexterity to make tools. That's a lot of resources! Not to mention our incredibly advanced brain.

Once you get to that point, evolution will stop, or at least slow down to a crawl.

Now obviously, the brain, eyes, and ears should be higher on the body to provide the most benefit.

The legs should be low to provide the most traction.

The arms should be midway to provide the most reach.

Add them all up, for an alien capable of building a spaceship, and you get a humanoid type body. Not exactly like us, but similar.

 

[RWS]

We should not expect a blob, or an eight armed, six legged creature, with it's head on the floor, to step out of a spaceship. Unless it's a nightmare. Or a B-movie.

 

[G.T.]

A mucous blob is not going to roll out of a spaceship. They need dexterity and building and survival skills. And obviously extreme intelligence.

And evolution would dictate that they have a humanoid form.

That is a rather silly assertion. What makes you think that the only body form that is dexterous and can be intelligent is the one we currently occupy? That is false with even a modicum of thought. The form that a particular intelligent life is going to take if there are some out there are going to depend on the conditions of the planet it evolves on and also on the other forms of life that it is competing with.

It's taken a lot of thought actually.

Evolution works on limited resources. Almost all of our resources went to development of our brain. That's why we are weak physically. And why we don't have extra arms or legs or eight eyes. Resources were shifted to brain development. Once we were intelligent enough to invent medicine, we stopped evolving. Because survival of the fittest doesn't apply to us anymore.

All you need is two eyes, for 3d vision. Two ears for 3d hearing. Two legs for moving. And two arms with appendages with enough complex dexterity to make tools. That's a lot of resources! Not to mention our incredibly advanced brain.

Once you get to that point, evolution will stop, or at least slow down to a crawl.

Now obviously, the brain, eyes, and ears should be higher on the body to provide the most benefit.

The legs should be low to provide the most traction.

The arms should be midway to provide the most reach.

Add them all up, for an alien capable of building a spaceship, and you get a humanoid type body. Not exactly like us, but similar.

Evolution never stops...I get what you are saying, that now both weak and dominant traits will be reproduced into our speciee because modern medicine allows them to survive...

but mutation never ceases.

In fact, our evolution is exascerbated by this because variations are all surviving... not only the "fittest" ones.

 

[Frannie]

A mucous blob is not going to roll out of a spaceship. They need dexterity and building and survival skills. And obviously extreme intelligence.

And evolution would dictate that they have a humanoid form.

That is a rather silly assertion. What makes you think that the only body form that is dexterous and can be intelligent is the one we currently occupy? That is false with even a modicum of thought. The form that a particular intelligent life is going to take if there are some out there are going to depend on the conditions of the planet it evolves on and also on the other forms of life that it is competing with.

It's taken a lot of thought actually.

Evolution works on limited resources. Almost all of our resources went to development of our brain. That's why we are weak physically. And why we don't have extra arms or legs or eight eyes. Resources were shifted to brain development. Once we were intelligent enough to invent medicine, we stopped evolving. Because survival of the fittest doesn't apply to us anymore.

All you need is two eyes, for 3d vision. Two ears for 3d hearing. Two legs for moving. And two arms with appendages with enough complex dexterity to make tools. That's a lot of resources! Not to mention our incredibly advanced brain.

Once you get to that point, evolution will stop, or at least slow down to a crawl.

Now obviously, the brain, eyes, and ears should be higher on the body to provide the most benefit.

The legs should be low to provide the most traction.

The arms should be midway to provide the most reach.

Add them all up, for an alien capable of building a spaceship, and you get a humanoid type body. Not exactly like us, but similar.

You clowns are seriously funny

 

[Frannie]

We should not expect a blob, or an eight armed, six legged creature, with it's head on the floor, to step out of a spaceship. Unless it's a nightmare. Or a B-movie.

Actually all of what you mentioned is more likely than humanoids of any kind. As for blobs a jellyfish would qualify as a blob. Why would life from another planet develop like us? If they do then we are clearly related

 

[G.T.]

We should not expect a blob, or an eight armed, six legged creature, with it's head on the floor, to step out of a spaceship. Unless it's a nightmare. Or a B-movie.

Actually all of what you mentioned is more likely than humanoids of any kind. As for blobs a jellyfish would qualify as a blob. Why would life from another planet develop like us? If they do then we are clearly related

That makes no sense. Physics dont stop on another planet..so survival of the fittest would still apply and our traits, intelligence namely, are the fittest and so over enough time it would make sense that many of the surviving organisms are JUST like us.