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

[sealybobo]

Small and ignorant is naturalist speak. Numbers? Please elaborate.

There are more suns in the universe than there are grains of sand on the beaches of the earth. Wake up you stupid humans. Let me guess, you believe in an invisible man who created you and has a heaven awaiting. Amirite?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Actually, I could not care less about you.

However, I will always try to correct wrong or sloppy information. So if you think I am "obsessed", realize that is likely because you repeatedly post incorrect information. Or things that simply do not apply to a topic.

To be honest, you really do not matter to me at all.

You're going to be embarrassed. I was talking about Unkotare. I like you, dick.

I was about to say. Unk actually isn't so bad either. Mushroom is like a breath of fresh air.. whereas ding, already revealing his true, wet fart value here, is the dick.

 

[Mushroom]

I like you, dick.

And notice, I said nothing directly against you at all. Simply the kinds of things I generally react to, and if it does not apply then it does not apply.

Notice I did not say "you" in the specific, but in the aspect that anybody who thinks I am obsessed about them is not realizing that I largely could not care about most in here. I respond to claims, and how likely they are when compared to facts. I take very little personally.

However, ding I am largely dismissing because he seems to fail to grasp a single theory that his own reference calls a "fringe theory" is just that.

 

[toobfreak]

OK, now I have absolutely no idea where you are trying to go with this timeline. Look, if you want to be taken seriously, how about sticking to a common timeline and not constantly shift it around at a whim?

Idiot, no one is shifting anything around. I can't help it you have the brains of a grapefruit and know about as much about astronomy and stratographic time as a baboon.

 

[toobfreak]

Only because of tidal forces. Just as many of the moons around the gas giants. It is no longer alive because of the core itself. It is because of outside influence.
And no one can say if our field will last that long? What in the hell do you think makes our magnetic field? Fairies and happy thoughts?

Asshole.

You shift your own timelines at a whim

I've shifted nothing around you asshole. I dare you to produced a published authoritarian source on the matter that says any different from what I've quoted you.

 

[Ringtone]

There are more suns in the universe than there are grains of sand on the beaches of the earth. Wake up you stupid humans. Let me guess, you believe in an invisible man who created you and has a heaven awaiting. Amirite?

You forgot to "therefore" your metaphysical presupposition of naturalism on rye with a side of ad hominem.

Allow me to clarify your reasoning, such as it is:

1. Naturalism is necessarily true.
2. Abiogenesis is necessarily possible.
3. Life necessarily arose on Earth via some process of chemical evolution.
4. There are gobs and gobs of stars.
5. Therefore, life necessarily exists elsewhere.

It would seem that your conclusion is necessarily embedded in a number of key premises that are indemonstrable assumptions.

Just saying.

 

[ding]

whereas ding, already revealing his true, wet fart value here, is the dick.

However, ding I am largely dismissing because he seems to fail to grasp a single theory that his own reference calls a "fringe theory" is just that.

Come at me, bro.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's the general consensus.

I recommend you go with that.

 

[Mushroom]

I've shifted nothing around you asshole.

RUBBISH. After the surface of the Earth sufficiently cooled and solidified, it took life here only about 200,000 years to emerge as prokaryotes, and only about another 1.5 billion years for eukaryotes, mitochondrial organelles and chloroplasts (the beginnings of multicellular, specialized cellular life) to emerge.

Yes, that impact reset the clock all over from the beginning, so you don't get to ADD that time to that coming after.


Eukaryotes emerged a little over 2 billion years ago, about 1.6 billion years after the first prokaryotes.


I said nothing about algae much less its emerging just 200,000 years after the Earth cooled. You better go back and learn to read. That first life likely appeared on the ocean floor in the form of chemoautotrophs. Cyanobacteria like blue-green algae did not appear in the historical record until long after the first prokaryotes, about 3.4 billion years ago, which is again, just a little over a billion years since the surface could first support life, all of which conflicts with your original claim as stated.

I can only respond to what you wrote. What you meant to say or implied is not the same thing. But you do seem to be bouncing all over the place. And the constant use of insults tends to make me believe you are just sloppy and irrational, and you just blindly lash out at anybody that does not agree with you.

Oh, and the green part I found particularly funny. You see, blue-green algae is also known as cyanobacteria. And the very reason that Prokaryote became used was to describe cyanobacteria, and differentiate them from Eukaryotes. So you literally are saying "Prokaryotes did not appear until after the first Prokaryotes".

As far as Prokaryotes and evolution, it is largely speculative as they do not positively appear in the fossil record until around 2.1 gya. But there is ample evidence in things like the change in the atmosphere that indicated they existed at least between 2.4-2.7 gya. And we do have stromalites that date to over 3.5 gya. They are believed to be cyanobacteria, but it is impossible to say if it is indeed the bluegreen algae, or some earlier variation.

So yes, you really are bouncing all over the board. But let me know when you actually want to try and discus science, and not just randomly lob insults at anybody that does not agree with you.

 

[ding]

I recommend you go with that.

I never said I didn't actually.

You guys are freaking hilarious.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I never said I didn't actually.

Ok good. So you do. Oh wait, you didn't say that either. So I guess this is where i say you are freaking hilarious.

 

[ding]

Ok good

So happy I have your blessing. You don't know how much that means to me.

 

[ding]

I know you are not, because now you have nothing to whine about and no good reason to change the topic to me. Bummer for you.

Did my roll my eyes emoticon give it away?

Ummm.... you were the one who initiated this conversation with me.

 

[ding]

Ok good. So you do. Oh wait, you didn't say that either. So I guess this is where i say you are freaking hilarious.

Are you done editing your posts?

 

[sealybobo]

I was about to say. Unk actually isn't so bad either. Mushroom is like a breath of fresh air.. whereas ding, already revealing his true, wet fart value here, is the dick.

Ding tries to be nice but his real personality comes out. Unkotare tries to be a dick but he isn't smart enough to get into a debate with anyone, so it's just him flinging poop. YOURE A RACIST poop. LIAR poop.

But never explaining why. He's the biggest dick.

Ding's just a stupid bible thumper who thinks he's smart enough to have proof of a god.

Unk is the worse. It must be he agrees with you so you don't see what a tool he is. He never answers any questions. I may not agree with you but when I ask you a simple question, you'll answer it right? He won't. So trust me, he's the biggest fool on USMB.

Just do a search for his name. Titles only. You'll see how many have started threads about what an asshole loser he is.

 

[toobfreak]

I can only respond to what you wrote. What you meant to say or implied is not the same thing. But you do seem to be bouncing all over the place. And the constant use of insults tends to make me believe you are just sloppy and irrational, and you just blindly lash out at anybody that does not agree with you.

Oh, and the green part I found particularly funny. You see, blue-green algae is also known as cyanobacteria. And the very reason that Prokaryote became used was to describe cyanobacteria, and differentiate them from Eukaryotes. So you literally are saying "Prokaryotes did not appear until after the first Prokaryotes".

As far as Prokaryotes and evolution, it is largely speculative as they do not positively appear in the fossil record until around 2.1 gya. But there is ample evidence in things like the change in the atmosphere that indicated they existed at least between 2.4-2.7 gya. And we do have stromalites that date to over 3.5 gya. They are believed to be cyanobacteria, but it is impossible to say if it is indeed the bluegreen algae, or some earlier variation.

So yes, you really are bouncing all over the board. But let me know when you actually want to try and discus science, and not just randomly lob insults at anybody that does not agree with you.

FUCK OFF YOU DEMENTED ASSHOLE. And take your pseudoscience bullshit and doubletalk and shove it all up your ass. You know nothing, and you babble gibberish. Better take out a better book to refer to from the school library, moron.

 

[ding]

Ok good. So you do. Oh wait, you didn't say that either. So I guess this is where i say you are freaking hilarious.

Why? Because I chimed in on a conversation about how long our core would keep generating its magnetic field with the comment that it depends on who is right about what our core is made of and then linked to a paper that hypothesized a nuclear core?

 

[sealybobo]

And notice, I said nothing directly against you at all. Simply the kinds of things I generally react to, and if it does not apply then it does not apply.

Notice I did not say "you" in the specific, but in the aspect that anybody who thinks I am obsessed about them is not realizing that I largely could not care about most in here. I respond to claims, and how likely they are when compared to facts. I take very little personally.

However, ding I am largely dismissing because he seems to fail to grasp a single theory that his own reference calls a "fringe theory" is just that.

Like I said before, Ding thinks he's smarter than he really is. Or he thinks we are dumber than we really are. Because he will post these things that might sound good but essentially, his posts are filled with fatal flaws.

Like one of these:

All Elephants are Grey
Ding is Grey
So Ding must be an Elephant.

 

[ding]

Like I said before, Ding thinks he's smarter than he really is. Or he thinks we are dumber than we really are. Because he will post these things that might sound good but essentially, his posts are filled with fatal flaws.

Like one of these:

All Elephants are Grey
Ding is Grey
So Ding must be an Elephant.

Really? I don't think I'm that smart. I think you guys think I'm smart.

Why else would you keep bringing it up?

 

[sealybobo]

FUCK OFF YOU DEMENTED ASSHOLE. And take your pseudoscience bullshit and doubletalk and shove it up all your ass. You know nothing, and you babble gibberish. Better take out a better book to refer to from the school library, moron.

You tell him Freak! Notice

You forgot to "therefore" your metaphysical presupposition of naturalism on rye with a side of ad hominem.

Allow me to clarify your reasoning, such as it is:

1. Naturalism is necessarily true.
2. Abiogenesis is necessarily possible.
3. Life necessarily arose on Earth via some process of chemical evolution.
4. There are gobs and gobs of stars.
5. Therefore, life necessarily exists elsewhere.

It would seem that your conclusion is necessarily embedded in a number of key premises that are indemonstrable assumptions.

Just saying.

No. I listen to the scientists. They tell us what star and planets are made up of. And it turns out shit is the same no matter where you go in the universe. All the building blocks of life are everywhere. And when the conditions are right, and that could be a planet like ours in the goldylocks zone or a moon that has water inside it and it gets stretched so much that the water stays liquid, like Europa,

Or the fact that they believe life was once on mars.

From what it looks like to scientists, life is probably EVERYWHERE in the universe. Just cause you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

It's you making the assumptions bro. Yes I am too but what I'm assuming is that if there are a trillion planets out there, and the building blocks of life are everyone, and cooked up in planets, and if it happened here, it probably happened elsewhere too.

Why are you so sure we are all there is? Does your bible have something to do with it? I have no bible telling me we are the only life in the universe. I have an open mind. You, maybe be brainwashed by a Christian cult. Just sayin