Spontaneous Life?

[_Chap]

I am a layman but I think I can answer this.

If it happened once, it should have happened again and again, yes? And should still be happening now, yes?

It doesn't need to happen very often to get the process started. It may have happened more than once, but the other forms of life died out.

The conditions for life to start may have existed in the ancient world, but no longer exist.

If it is happening now these life forms would have to compete with existing life for resources. Existing life would have a large advantage over life that had just barely formed. The new life would not likely survive.

Does Stormy Waters have me on ignore?

Or has he not noticed that I have made both his points already, twice, and with more specific scientific detail?

Maybe it is just the way the system works, and I am not trying to stop Southwest saying what he wants, when he wants, but it does seem a bit strange.

[_huckelberry]

Hoops makes a reasonable and apropos observation.

There is abosolutely zero evidence of life existing on other planets. That does not prevent scientifically minded people from infering that there is.Nor does it mean there is no life on other planets.

I suspect there is intended irony about the relationship between belief and evidence. (both belief in God and belief in life on other planets are inferences lacking direct evidence)

Regards the unrelated possible curiosity, I believe there is likely to be life on other planets some where. They all have the same creator God.

[_Stormy Waters]

Does Stormy Waters have me on ignore?

Or has he not noticed that I have made both his points already, twice, and with more specific scientific detail?

Maybe it is just the way the system works, and I am not trying to stop Southwest saying what he wants, when he wants, but it does seem a bit strange.

I don't have you on ignore, I stepped away while writing my post and didn't check all the additional posts before submitting. Your post is better and I defer to yours.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

. life is a chemical process

I would love to see this fleshed out (pun intended).

Unless it's a derailment, but I think it's germane.

I am not a scientist, but a historian so keep that in mind.

Lipids stick together, amino acids combined, eventually you get replicating molecules in a lipid shell. Easy enough. The lipid shells things still react with each other and with other chemicals evolving all the way until replicating molecules are stable. Then over vast time scales those react into protein folded structures and eventually into proto-cells. Proto-cells develop into cells ad you have life.

One chemical reaction into another. I am of the opinion that "life" is merely a cultural construct similar to race and gender. There is no boundary between living and non-living. Everything is alive and everything is dead.

How was that?

[_Chap]

Does Stormy Waters have me on ignore?

Or has he not noticed that I have made both his points already, twice, and with more specific scientific detail?

Maybe it is just the way the system works, and I am not trying to stop Southwest saying what he wants, when he wants, but it does seem a bit strange.

I don't have you on ignore, I stepped away while writing my post and didn't check all the additional posts before submitting. Your post is better and I defer to yours.

Phew! Thanks ... I thought I might be going the way of whyme for a minute or two.

[_Hoops]

Yes No

LOL!!! Jersey Girl is wonderful!!

[_Fence Sitter]

I am sorry I do not understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that you do not believe there is life on other planets,

I do not. I have seen no evidence of this. Have you?

or that a religious person could not make such a claim without being criticized?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

The evidence I see, and as I said I am not well informed on the subject, is that given we exist here on this planet, and given the number of planets estimated in the universe (a staggeringly high number even if it were only a one to one relationship to the number of stars) then the odds are there is other life out there. Of course the 'evidence' I see is based on a belief in those very processes that Ceeboo was asking about.

As a side note, I have to ask if you know (I am pretty sure you do) that LDS believe in life on other planets, human life no less?

[_Hoops]

I am not a scientist, but a historian so keep that in mind.

Ah, an academic from my side of the aisle. I knew I liked you, I just could never pinpoint why.

Lipids stick together, amino acids combined, eventually you get replicating molecules in a lipid shell. Easy enough.

Ok.

The lipid shells things still react with each other

And here we get to the meat of it. Why? What is it that causes them to do so?

and with other chemicals evolving all the way until replicating molecules are stable.

Why would they want to do that?

Then over vast time scales those react into protein folded structures and eventually into proto-cells. Proto-cells develop into cells ad you have life.

Yes, but do you? Do you have life? What does that mean?

I am of the opinion that "life" is merely a cultural construct similar to race and gender.

Interesting thought. As you might guess, I would vehemently disagree. But why do you say so?

There is no boundary between living and non-living. Everything is alive and everything is dead.

This sound more of philosophy than science. Aren't we supposed to defer to science exclusively? tongue in cheek, by the way.

How was that?

Excellent! Thanks.

I might offer this. Let's assume that all the explanations that have been offered, and will be offered, are correct. One still can't get around the idea that life is more than chemical reactions. The stuff of life is much more than synapses firing. Even at the smallest scale.

[_Ceeboo]

Taking a break from lurking (JayGee had to check on her roast so I have a moment until she returns to our lovely sofa)

Life from inorganic matter is not spontaneous? (I can't imagine another possible choice?)

As for the rest of the contributions (I do appreciate them) (I believe, it look like, it probably, etc, etc)........well.....please forgive me if I suggest that they sound A LOT like faith statements.

Have we ever seen life come from non-life? Ever?

Gotta run, I hear JaaGee coming!

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Chap]

Taking a break from lurking (JayGee had to check on her roast so I have a moment until she returns to our lovely sofa)

Life from inorganic matter is not spontaneous? (I can't imagine another possible choice?)

As for the rest of the contributions (I do appreciate them) (I believe, it look like, it probably, etc, etc)........well.....please forgive me if I suggest that they sound A LOT like faith statements.

Have we ever seen life come from non-life? Ever?

Gotta run, I hear JaaGee coming!

Peace,
Ceeboo

How does the statement that the oxygenation of the earth's atmosphere (easily traceable in the geological record) radically changed the chemical conditions from those under which life is thought to have been formed count as a faith statement? That is just a fact of chemistry.

How does the statement that the existence of life that is already making intensive use of available chemical nutrients makes the survival of new proto-life difficult count as a faith statement? That is just a fact about what living things do to their environment.