Oh yes...finally. Time to send probes to the Asteroid belt and Kuniper belt...and to really closely re-examine the vast collection of meteorites worldwide.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't now, this is getting vetted to the nth degree and could turn out what he found is really terrestrial in nature.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
Charles Capps
We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.
Member # 9
quote:But even worse, the paper claiming the discovery of bacteria fossils in carbonaceous chondrites was published in … the Journal of Cosmology. I've mentioned Cosmology before — it isn't a real science journal at all, but is the ginned-up website of a small group of crank academics obsessed with the idea of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe that life originated in outer space and simply rained down on Earth. It doesn't exist in print, consists entirely of a crude and ugly website that looks like it was sucked through a wormhole from the 1990s, and publishes lots of empty noise with no substantial editorial restraint.
posted
Sigh. By the time we find REAL life from somewhere else, no one's going to believe it. It's the frakking boy who cried wolf.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
You mean not everything I read on the net is real? I fell my whole world view slipping away!
Seriously though I have to admit I took this one at face value too until Charles posted that link. I'm ashamed really, I thought I was much more cynical than this. I suppose the lesson is to beware of blindly trusting news stories that you want to believe.
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: You mean not everything I read on the net is real? I fell my whole world view slipping away!
Seriously though I have to admit I took this one at face value too until Charles posted that link. I'm ashamed really, I thought I was much more cynical than this. I suppose the lesson is to beware of blindly trusting news stories that you want to believe.
I was excited too, but as I read the claims of some skeptics, my excitement waned as I came to see this either as a hoax or a big mistake. And it was on Fox News, the first sign that something fishy was going on.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Put that in your bible and smoke it, creationists!
Also, finding life somewhere else in the universe wouldn't necessarily contradict the Bible's account of creation.
Just FYI.
Really? Aliens would believe in that whole "7 days" bullshit? Scientists- really, all rational people- dont buy that. (of course, I'm talking about creationists taking the bible as a literal telling and believing that man wiped out the donosaurs, etc...)
...and what happens if the aliens are talking snakes?
Damn...what's so annoying is that there really is still a chance this guy is totally correct in his findings- but going through such a shakey means to announce, and wothout a ton of peer review, really hurts his case. You know, I still feel good insulting creationists- put that in your pipe and smoke it, bible thumping whackos!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think Aban's point was that, to a creationist, extraterrestrial life would just mean that, after Yahweh spent a week building the Earth, he went off and spent a week building a planet of aliens somewhere else. Martian bacteria or whatever would do nothing to make them let go of their "god did it" Theory of Everything.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
First of all, let's make a distinction between a Creationist (which I'm not) and someone who believes in Creation (which I do).
If you look at other instances in the Bible where the word "day" is used, you find it doesn't always mean a 24 hour period. Sometimes it's used to signify a period of time with a determined beginning and a determined end. So when the account describes seven creative days, there's no reason to assume it means seven 24 hour periods, which is obviously inaccurate.
And yes, nowhere does it say that nothing else was going on anywhere in the universe at the same time the action on Earth was happening.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh I son don't want to turn this into a religous argument but...OK, here's what I don't understand about otherwise reasonable and intelligent people who claim to believe in this stuff; why lend so much credence to this book?
It's not like it materialised out of thin air with an almighty crack of thunder and burst of light. It was written by men. Many men (and possibly women, who knows) over the course of centuries and probably millennia. Hell, technically it wasn't even written but compiled for a great many sources, their inclusion and indeed reading order voted on by a bunch of bishops who were probably born as pagans. Even at that point, a lot of the text had already been translated several times and has been translates several times since then. Therefore there's no way of knowing how elements--big and small--have been mistranslated, distorted or outright edited (I recall a few instances 'Gods' plural sneaking though) mostly to suit the beliefs of what was at the time an increasingly powerful social political movement that had just effectively taken over what was left of the Roman Empire.
Still, even if we ignore all that, the text was written by humans, the really early stuff probably several thousand years BC (maybe more than is thought even) it's just some early cultures' stories of how things came to be and probably came from the same place most creation myths come from...eating funny looking mushrooms and cactus juice in the middle of a hot desert, mixed with a little imagination and some moral parable to make it worth retelling.
This document, though fascinating and of great historical significance is no more useful as a guide to the origins of life, matter and the universe in general than something I might scribble down on the back of a napkin. From a linguistic standpoint alone, splitting hairs over what the definition of a "day" did or did not mean to suit a more modern scientific view of things is utterly futile when you have zero idea how much that passage has changed from one translation to the next. Even god does exist and did whisper this in the ear of some tribal story teller somewhere in pre-ice age Africa, ever since then it's been through the mother of all games of Chinese whispers.
Seen in it's historical context, this book (of which I might add, there are numerous versions depending on denomination) is full of slanted information, most of it probably not even written down until at least generation or so after the supposed incident(s) took place. Take Joshua for example; if that account of the fall of Jericho (taken at face value in this case) isn't a bunch of propaganda and justification after the fact for what amounts to mass genocide I don't know what is. On the other hand it may or may not also contain what could be the earliest recorded use of cannon fire, but that's another matter...
I'm not disputing the existence of god (what'd be the point?) or a person's right to have faith and take great solace and comfort from the bible and other similar holy books, because they are powerful works and offer valid moral and spiritual guidance...but it's not a good source of solid facts.
Charles Capps
We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.
Member # 9
posted
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: Also, finding life somewhere else in the universe wouldn't necessarily contradict the Bible's account of creation.[/QB]
This is correct, because reality itself has already contradicted the bible's account of creation.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Why is an interesting word. It sets intelligent people apart. People who genuinely ask "why?" are seeking to improve their knowledge in the world around them.
Science fiction fans like to ask why. We like to speculate. We like to communicate. We like to understand.
Speculate. Communicate. Understand.
Why?
When a respected or intelligent person presents a different point of view, a reasoning individual will stop and ask why. One will seek understanding before hastily rushing to conclusion. After all, if this intelligent person believe it, then perhaps there is some merit.
So we have less than rational sounding people extolling the virtues of the Bible. Does that automatically make the Bible wrong? We also have less than rational sounding people extolling the virtues of eating a balanced diet, getting enough rest, staying healthy, exercise, etc... Many of you rational people here believe the same things that less-rational people do. Does that make you wrong? Does the fact that there are nuts that believe in exercise and good hygiene make those values meaningless?
Perhaps instead of just lambasting an intelligent person about their belief in the Bible/Evolution/Alien Life (take your pick, plenty of sides), it would be intelligent to ask them why they believe that way.
Then let them answer. Let them use reason, logic and evidence to back up their claim. Listen to their argument and see if there is some merit.
Lets try to be open-minded and not closed-minded.
Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, I more concerned about the political and social implications of extraterrestrial life on Earth. I mean on the one hand it could change everything about the way view ourselves, especially in regards to things like race, ethnicity, and nationality. On the other had, it could also exacerbate the problems that arise with such divisions, especially if ET comes bearing gifts of advanced technology.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh without a doubt, the genuine discovery of extraterrestrial life would be a whole new can of worms for the human race to deal with, regardless of how it effects your religious beliefs.
One likes to think it would unite people. However, especially if some advantage were perceived, it would likely just become something else to fight about.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
