once i read this book on natural history, evolution, and dellimas of those two. it presented one interesting question, with two even more interesting answers. the question was 'how probable is life?' the two possible answers were:

1) does our galaxy swarm with life because matter has a tendancy to form more and more complex structures whose properties include the potential to modify and reproduce themselves?

2) or does the simplest creature on earth embody a chain of causes each so unlikeley that it ennables us to predict that one small solar system born less than 5 billion years ago would harbor life in pattern of our earth?

i wasnt quite sure where to put this, so moderators move it if it belongs in extraterestrials. crap. io just realized i put an 'e' in iteresting instead of an 'i'

I belive its a mixter of the two resons
and a bit of inteligent boosting
by unkown universal caretakers

what? why is everything you write in prose? prose is fine, sure, but not when trying to get a point over.
and the 'two reasons' or more appropriatly, 'two answers' are based exclusivley on evolution, which i remember you considered 'trash'.

Evolution is a way of the universe
But i belive only when dealing with anything other than breathing life
example,moons,stars,planets,galexies
im just a dumb person who never gets my message across the way i want
So ,i guess my veiws are abit diffrent,
but who wants to live in a uncertain world with so many certain people
Take care

What??????????????????

Dude, the theory of evolution is only applicable to iological lifeforms. Tell me how a planet get mutated and go through natural selection...

excuse mr spartan. he knows absolutly nothing about evolution. i cant imagine why he proclaims to believe it.

I lean more towards the second arguement...

At the end of the day, the possibility of life is so slim that not every other planet in the cosmos is going to have an advanced species peering back at us. However, I still hold that there are so many planets out there, and such a vast universe, that the laws of average dictate it had to happen somewhere else

However, I still think people who think they're popping by our solar system drink too much.

Spartan Euclideus,

Being a quadrilateral communicator will get you
boxed in, sometimes.
And, that is something of your personal style.
As for me, I am diffuse.
Hats off to solid form...
That aside, you may be on to something.
Stellar systems do indeed evolve, as far as I'm concerned.
Hydrogen evolved, stars and planets, and galaxies
all compete, co-operate, make and break the rules, sometimes.
They are born, they live, and die, and rebear themselves
to higher form, sometimes.
May I quote? I wish I had Samuel Johnson's Dictionary,
It might have an interesting definition.
But, let us see what Merriam-Webster says-

4 entries found for evolution.

evolution-creative evolution-emergent evolution-parallelism

Main Entry: evo·lu·tion
Pronunciation: "e-v&-'lü-sh&n, "E-v&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin evolution-, evolutio unrolling, from evolvere
1 : one of a set of prescribed movements
2 a : a process of change in a certain direction : UNFOLDING b : the action or an instance of forming and giving something off : EMISSION c (1) : a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state : GROWTH (2) : a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance d : something evolved
3 : the process of working out or developing
4 a : the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species) : PHYLOGENY b : a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations
5 : the extraction of a mathematical root
6 : a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena

You sir, deserve a modicum of recognition.

I'll get him to read it later


Must be asked...what's with the recent flood of religious members who write in prose?

Anyway, it's true that the term "evolution" can now be given to almost any process by which something changes into something else, it is not the term in which we are applying it. Planets certainly did not undergo natural selection...I doubt very much there was a "survival of the fittest" scenario in which Earth managed to bully its way into the perfect niche for supporting life by pushing smaller planets closer to the sun, and leaping in there faster that big 'ol lumbering Mars could

I'm sure, as living beings, they have their way of doing this. We just can't understand it. At least not yet. I'm sure the galaxy works by survival of the fittest. I mean, asteroids and comets hit planets all the time. It's said that a comet the size of mars has hit the earth at one point, creating the moon.

Did I miss the point where planets became living beings? I must have skipped that lecture...

mr spartan, that certainly is an interesting idea
ive heard it before;
and i cant say i agree with it
but this came to me in its defense:
viruses are not considered scientifically alive because they do not eat,
nor do they drink,
nor grow or develop,
only reproduce and move;
that is only 2 out of 6 of the charicteristics of living things;
what if the earth is like them?
sorry about the prose-
i just had to try it, you see;
it will not become a habit.

Well, the comet didn't hit head on, it just kind of grased one side of Earth. I'm not saying that all planets are indeed alive. I'm just speaking hypothetically, since evolution can only be attributed to lifeforms.

Hi, Spart-
And Mr. Man who works hard, in boots!

If I may help this proceed, let me just say that I am no poet,
but I would guess that the term prose is derived from proceed.
To proceed is to go straight forward.
To not tarry in the abstract.
So, to me, prose is directness.

I assume Man views Sparty's efforts as briefly written thoughts,
which look like measured meter, or poetry.

As for me, they are neither, as he writes. But rather, they are
short decriptions of things he may not have grappled with,
except in an intuitive, personal feeling way.

I will admit, I know little on Mendleleav, or whatever his name was,
and even less about Darwin.

Please let me make an observation. Dad had a pigeon coup.
When he was a boy, that coup in our yard was his hobby. He raised racing pigeons. He raced his neighbor. His neighbor always won.
Dad said his pigeons always looked the same, but the neighbor's
got more and more fancy- through breeding.

The man next door understood selective breeding. That took place over
several years. Imagine thousands of years, or millions of days
of different weather, habitat changes, food deprivation and migration.

Those who 'adapted', but were caught short when serious changes,
or a cataclysmic event occured, those comfortable and able ones
may not have made the change to the new situation.

But, if there were some that had new and unique random characteristics,
and if they enabled those members of that group to survive into the
new situation, then they were lucky. And they got fat and sassy, and
reproduced. The situation maybe repeats. Time went on, the bulk
of the population 'adapts', a few odd-ones are created, who are odd,
but healthy, then events happen. The mass dies off, the odd characters
survive, and so on.
So, the odd ones are few. The mass is many. The odd ones depend
on the mass for reproduction opportunities, if necessary.

So, I see evolution as mutually interdependent classes of individuals,
both common and odd; and along with events in the environment,
species change.

Nature is limited, in how it cares for living creatures. It only has so much
to give. Continents move, weather changes when volcanoes
erupt, like Krakatoa, the plentiful food disappears.
Times get lean, and the tough get going.

Do not underestimate the soft side of nature. Love is real. I have seen
animals that adore their mates. They feel love, I have seen adoration
between animals. O.K., maybe its biology, but it happens...

Sparty- educated people argue the whys and wherefores of evolution.
It has many levels of study, from molecules, to mountaintops.

If you want to fight with the best of them, get a basic idea, or a feel
for the well studied versions. And you MUST round it out with a basic
understanding of the overlapping fields, like basic chemistry, and
basic paleontology- very, very basic will do...

If you went out, like they did, and dug around, and looked at samples,
and did laboratory studies, and held conferences, then at least give them
an ounce of credit.

By the same token- be open minded to new ideas, your own, especially.

IF YOU BELIEVE NOT ALL IS KNOWN, AND A REVOLUTION IN THINKING
ABOUT OUR HUMAN ANCESTRY IS POSSIBLE, YOU ARE ENTITLED
TO THAT BELIEF. CERTAINLY, AND ACCELERATION MY HAVE OCCURRED
SOMEWHERE, SOMETIME... UNEXPLAINED.

You must realize the implications. There is a lot to consider, a lot of
inferring about manipulations. By whom, when, where, and by what
generation would someone arrive at the desired change?

You see? Did they induce instant change, over a few years?
Did they wait with the patience of generations?
What was the timeline for advanced biological manipulation?
Was it to reap instant results, steal the results, and scoot off to
the next world? Was it to keep us from going extinct?
Why would they care? How long do they live, these manipulators?
What is their timeline and agenda?
See?
Questions... See ya...

It is totally irresponsible and selfish to believe that we are the only planet harboring life in the universe. Not too long ago "we" believed that there wasn't water on Mars, now what? This will sink in to nay-sayers over time and after a few more yrs. there will be another "little" announcement. I think that the gov't is just gearing us up for the big announcement that we are not alone. I believe with Bush wanting a manned mission to Mars that we will all find out the truth. Maybe not right then but soon after.

I tend to believe that there is life on other planets. How it got there, if a God put it there (or, for that matter, put us here), I don't know. It just seems ridiculously closed-minded and ethnocentric (no, that's not quite right...speciescentric? earthcentric?) to assume that we're IT, here on earth.

But mainly, what's up with the "don't write in prose" stuff? ALL of our posts are prose. That is, prose is just regular written language (as opposed to poetry). Short stories, newspaper articles, the back of a cereal box -- all prose.

What some members are writing in is a sort of "chopped up" prose, kind of like a prose poem.

I really don't know how to put this but I have a theory on life and the universe. I have no formal knowledge, really, of biology besides high school or astronomy but have been trying to learn more on my own. With that said....

I believe that one of the basic structures of our bodies the cell is much like the earth and the stars. Cells have a nucleus, protons, electrons, cell wall. To me the earth is just another cell making up something bigger, maybe God. We are the protons and electrons running around making stuff happen. Growth.

I look at the night sky and see many different areas of spiralling star systems. Like DNA double-helix. The Dogon peoples of Africa believe that a race of reptilians came from the dog star Sirius system and it's sister star and cross-bred with a species from earth so they could survive. Until recent times Westerners thought that there wasn't another star with Sirius. When the two were studied they moved in the double-helix pattern much like DNA.

Does this sound logical about the whole earth cell thing?

It's possible there is life on other planets but not as likely as people think.
Sorry to burst your bubble but 80% of those stars are Red Dwarfs and are not capable of being a life supporting sun to planets.
One reason is they emit most their radiation during their red phase and photosynthesis needs both red and blue light. These stars are also of considerably less mass than our sun and a planet would have to orbit very close to generate enough heat to maintain a liquid surface.
The problem with that is tidal force gets stronger as you move in so the planet would end up in tidally-locked state. This means that it would always present the same face toward the sun. The lit side would be very hot and dry and the unlit side extremely cold and icy.
Red dwarfs also dont produce much ultraviolet light which you need early on to build up oxygen in the atmosphere.
There are also there types of galaxies.
Spiral, which is our own Milky Way.
Elliptical, which are egg shaped and are dangerous places not likely to have life supporting planets. Most galaxies are elliptical.
Irregular, which is disorganized and distorted and are even more dangerous than elliptical.

Mr. Man Whose Feet are Immaculate, No Doubt, and So Protected

If I gave you a large amount of hydrogen, and given its really neat
properties, do you think that by itself, it might come up with life?
I mean, it has some very distinguishing charateristics, non?
You may ask, how did it arrive at those neat qualities?
The ability to keep on rolling the dice...

To walk outside on a spring day, and see the first pink blooms on a
peach tree, that makes me stop wondering, and start appreciating.
And when, on the fourth or fifth day, it suddenly grows leaves
two inches long, overnight, I stop wondering. And when I smell the
new grasses, I just accept it all.

How many times would a god need to create its life drama?
How many earths would be needed to possibly enrich the meaning
of the Universe? The question becomes academic.

As for me, I'll be content knowing my lack of knowledge does,
in no way, constrain the inventiveness of all creation.

Ok I'm going out on a limb here...The theory of how we got here that I believe really doesn't go along with how the Bible is. I have been warned before for speaking down about religion. I did not believe in God or anything of the Bible until I met a person who is a good friend of mine now. He has taught me and shown me many books about life in general.

Life does exist on other planets and all over the universe. The fact that Earth is such a small part of the universe and has life should show the human race that there is obviously life out there somewhere, otherwise I don't think we would even be here. Life exists on other planets in other dimensions. We live on the 3rd dimension on Earth. There is still 11 other dimensions on Earth along with 12 octaves for each one. It is a hard concept to understand for a lot of people. The way we look at life is the only way we know how to. There is other dimensions here on Earth some of which could be very devistating. Fact is we can only understand the dimension we are in.

Some of you might think I am crazy or something but I have my beliefs. Fact is I don't believe in religion. What I believe happened is that there was a form of life on the planet Pluto which needed the element Gold to survive. They created 2 little monkey like creatures which we unable to reproduce until they ate the certain fruit quite similar to how the Bible puts it. They were created to mine gold and mine gold only. The foreign race did not want them to reproduce to create what is now today a human. They found the fruit and they started the human race. The 2 creatures are Adam and Eve I suppose. They found the fruit and they created our race. They decided to come here to mine the gold because the Earth's supply of gold at that time was extraordinary. They got tired of mining gold all day themselves so they created 2 slaves almost to do their work for them. This may make me sound insane but I have seen a few pictures floating around portraying Adam and Eve as primate type creatures with fur on their bodies. This theory almost combines evolution with the bible, think about it...ya never know!

Definately #1

Cute.

yeah, uh, cool poem, Mr. Mickyboy, but this is absolutly hilarious
"get away frorm me son ya bother me"

I find it scarey how many people think that life can only be something that is just like ours that needs photosynthesis and light and oxygen. We made up the definition of "life"! We came up with the idea of what is "alive" and what is not and we attached a word to it. That doesn't mean that our definition of it is a universal law. Heck, we're the ones who came up with the idea of a "universal law." I think we all (I admit, myself included) need to think outside the box more! Please tell me that someone gets what I'm saying.