Contact - the Objective Evidence

[doctor wu]

A link to a wiki piece on the Urantia book. For those who want a full background on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book

I recall trying to read it over 30 years ago along with many other 'esoteric' books.....made it about half way through then skimmed the rest. An interesting channeled esoteric tome. Not from 'angelic ET's '  imho but if that's what someone wants to believe then I suppose it's no worse than believing in the Bible for instance.

 

 

[Will Due]

2 minutes ago, doctor wu said:

I recall trying to read it over 30 years ago

 

 

 

[Mr Walker]

On 24/11/2017 at 3:41 AM, Piney said:

Someone doesn't know the basic rules of biology........

You mean, of human biology, of course?  I think it was Carl Sagan who produced an excellent documentary on this, looking at the diversity of alien life, which could exist and evolve, using just the known and proven  laws of biology, physics and chemistry.  The range was very diverse.

  

[Piney]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

You mean, of human biology, of course?  I think it was Carl Sagan who produced an excellent documentary on this, looking at the diversity of alien life, which could exist and evolve, using just the known and proven  laws of biology, physics and chemistry.  The range was very diverse.

  

No, biology as a whole. "Non breathers" cannot exist.  Everything needs to respirate some form of liquid or gas. Everything needs to breath.

[Mr Walker]

On 24/11/2017 at 1:42 AM, Will Due said:

Ever wonder if there are other worlds out there that are inhabited? I have. If so, would these worlds be like our world where man evolved, or would the beings that evolved there be different?

Astronomers have discovered that there are many other planets out there. Most appear to be very different than ours while some are very similar in size and distance from their sun. If there are advanced inhabited worlds out there, why haven't they contacted us? They must know we're here right?

For now let's say that they have contacted us, but just not how we would expect. If you were there then, would you have had any questions to ask them about the nature of these other inhabited worlds and the beings that have evovled there?

Questions like:

Does life evolve on habitable worlds in the same way?

What qualifies a world for the existence of evolutionary life?

Does life always result in evolving beings like us, similar in physical constitution, bipedal?

Does life begin by accident or is it initiated by beings from other more advanced worlds?

Does life exist only on worlds where an atmosphere and oceans exist or does life exist on worlds where an atmosphere would be toxic to us, or is absent altogether?

I'm sure if we had enough time, this list of questions would be very long.




Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

 

http://bigbluebook.org/49/

 

 

I  have deliberately left out the last few lines, which i think distracted people from the very interesting questions raised here 

Scientifically the answers are unproven but generally the scientific  consensus is that, given the nature and process of  evolution of life on earth there will be any other species around just our galaxy  Already many planets have ben discovered in the "goldilocks zone" which would support human type life, let alone more hardy, resilient or differently based lifeforms.

here are my common sense answers to the questions

Evolution is a common process, but the elements of evolution respond to natural environments, and thus different naturla environments can produce very divergent species. 

As far as we know now, a certain range of light, temperature, and water is necessary because the other  basic chemical building blocks are widespread  across the galaxy  However, even on earth, some organisms live in total darkness from thermal energy,  so some of the conditions may not be needed

Absolutely not.  Many lizards on earth have three eyes and other animals are very different to humans The question rally is what brain capacity is required to evolve human level consciousness but consciousness is not limited to human like forms even on earth 

So far only one  self aware conscious species has evolved on earth to a high level, and that is us. Likewise around the galaxy, statistically it is probable that  life is much more abundant than life which evolves high order, self aware consciousness  

Life may be the natural expression of the universe's natural tendency towards order  On earth it has been a process of luck and  randomnesses, but also cause and effect, as certain conditions drive certain responses. 

One can run computer simulations which show how life might evolve under difernt conditions  but this would be an unknown  water seems to be one necessity but we are judging this from our own example  Certainly life can exist in difernt atmospheres, than that of earth. After all, many animals have adapted to living in water 

We know there are bacteria which can survive in a vacuum for a long period. but whether the y could evolve under those conditions is unclear

I will stop there, not to confuse the issue, but the galaxy is full of life forms, many totally unlike humans.

There  are even a lot of advanced life forms whose evolution varies from around Australopithecus through to highly  advanced species who have built  galaxy spanning communication and transport networks.

  In between are many around human level with difernt levels of local and interstellar space flight. However the more advanced species use matter transmission and portal or local worm hole structures to cover long distance travel '

However this is personal knowledge from personal experience, and thus non verifiable at the present time   I was even reluctant to mention it because it might prejudice the response to the first part of  my post    

.

[Mr Walker]

29 minutes ago, Piney said:

No, biology as a whole. "Non breathers" cannot exist.  Everything needs to respirate some form of liquid or gas. Everything needs to breath.

Actually that is not quite true, even on earth. 

Deep in the Mediterranean, scientists have discovered the first complex animals known to live without oxygen.

 

It was previously thought that only viruses and single-celled microbes could survive without oxygen long-term.

But three new species of multi cellular animals found during recent research expeditions live comfortably in oxygen-free depths, said team leader Roberto Danovaro of Italy's Polytechnic University of Marche.

Most multicellar organisms, including humans, have structures inside their cells called mitochondria, which use oxygen to convert nutrients into energy molecules known as ATP. (See an overview of how our cells work.)

The new animals appear to have modified versions of mitochondria called hydrogenosomes, which can produce ATP without oxygen. Hydrogenosomes were previously known only in single-celled organisms.

It's possible that a common ancestor of these animals from hundreds of millions of years ago had the ability to live without oxygen at least part of the time, said Marek Mentel, a biochemist at Comenius University in Slovakia who was not part of the expedition team.

As oxygen became more abundant, first in the atmosphere and then in the ocean, two lineages formed, with most—but not all—animals adapting to their new oxygen-rich environments.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/04/100416-oxygen-free-complex-animals-mediterranean/

Thus it seems we evolved to use oxygen because it was there, but if it had not been, then a different from of evolution may still have produced life 

[Illyrius]

6 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Absolutely not.  Many lizards on earth have three eyes and other animals are very different to humans The question rally is what brain capacity is required to evolve human level consciousness but consciousness is not limited to human like forms even on earth 

Do you know that Morrison proclaimed himself a lizard king?

 

[Mr Walker]

Just now, Mr. Argon said:

Do you know that Morrison proclaimed himself a lizard king?

 

Was that because he had opened his third eye?  or because he thought he was a T Rex ?  

[Illyrius]

1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

Was that because he had opened his third eye?  or because he thought he was a T Rex ?  

Me thinks he thought he was a T rex.

[Will Due]

 

I think Morrison thought he was the lizard king because he didn't like his one-eyed trouser trout.

 

 

[Illyrius]

Just now, Will Due said:

 

I think Morrison thought he was the lizard king because he didn't like his one-eyed trouser trout.

 

 

[Illyrius]

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually that is not quite true, even on earth. 

Deep in the Mediterranean, scientists have discovered the first complex animals known to live without oxygen.

Interesting.

[Mr Walker]

On 24/11/2017 at 4:18 AM, Piney said:

That's irrelevant. No matter what, they need to breath. They need too for it to be conscious life. It might be a different biology but the mechanics behind it will still be the same.

As pointed out, this is untrue, even on earth. It is not surprising that many people don't know this, but it is surprising in this day that they didn't check out such a premise with a few words, doing a google check. 

Life here evolved to breathe a gas inside water  because the gas existed, but some life forms evolved without needing to breathe that water borne gas However because of our oxygen rich atmosphere, evolution "used" that to produce the life forms we find on earth today.  if our atmosphere had been different, then different life forms would have evolved If we had had NO atmosphere then lifeforms would  (or at least COULD)   still have evolved 

[Piney]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

As pointed out, this is untrue, even on earth. It is not surprising that many people don't know this, but it is surprising in this day that they didn't check out such a premise with a few words, doing a google check. 

Life here evolved to breathe a gas inside water  because the gas existed, but some life forms evolved without needing to breathe that water borne gas However because of our oxygen rich atmosphere, evolution "used" that to produce the life forms we find on earth today.  if our atmosphere had been different, then different life forms would have evolved If we had had NO atmosphere then lifeforms would  (or at least COULD)   still have evolved 

But they would still need some form of the chemical reaction called respiration. Even some form of hydrocarbon. There could never be a "non breather".

[Illyrius]

4 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

 life forms would have evolved If we had had NO atmosphere then lifeforms would  (or at least COULD)   still have evolved 

this opens a possibility of lifeforms on any planet in our solar system, even a sun itself. no?

[Mr Walker]

Just now, Mr. Argon said:

Interesting.

As stated above, it fascinates me how people make assumptions,  but more than that, how they then deduce false conclusions, based on their false assumptions eg  " because almost all animals breathe (and the posters thought that ALL things living needed to breathe)  then breathing must be necessary for life to start or to evolve"

Breathing appears to be one pathway or response to specific conditions during EARTH'S evolution of life.  It doesn't mean it is necessary for life which evolves in different ways  (Although i agree we don't know if  truly complex life forms like humans could evolve without breathing, but if some animals can, then it is a t least possible    

[doctor wu]

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

 

I'm a fan of the Dan.....guess where my board name came from...?

To be honest I'd rather spend the time listening to The Dan that reading that channeled nightmare.

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

 

 

[Piney]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenobiology

[Illyrius]

The new animals appear to have modified versions of mitochondria called hydrogenosomes, which can produce ATP without oxygen. Hydrogenosomes were previously known only in single-celled organisms.

can you explain this Walker?

alot of scientific jargon here.

ATP

adenosine triphosphate; a nucleotide found in the mitochondria of all plant and animal cells. It is the major source of energy for cellular reactions, this energy being released during its conversion to ADP. Formula: C 10 H 16 N 5 O 13 P 3

 

huh?

Edited December 7, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[Will Due]

18 minutes ago, doctor wu said:

 

 

 

 

[Illyrius]

38 minutes ago, Piney said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenobiology

Xeno nucleic acid (XNA) is a synthetic alternative to the natural nucleic acids DNA and RNA as information-storing biopolymers that differs in the sugar backbone.^[1] As of 2011, at least six types of synthetic sugars have been shown to form nucleic acid backbones that can store and retrieve genetic information. Research is now being done to create synthetic polymerases to transform XNA. The study of its production and application has created a field known as xenobiology.

Although the genetic information is still stored in the four canonical base pairs (unlike other nucleic acid analogues), natural DNA polymerases cannot read and duplicate this information. Thus the genetic information stored in XNA is “invisible” and therefore useless to natural DNA-based organisms.

[Mr Walker]

Just now, Mr. Argon said:

this opens a possibility of lifeforms on any planet in our solar system, even a sun itself. no?

Not just a possibility but indeed a probability  They will probably be simple life forms but there existence is highly probable. eg Enceladus is a prime candidate, if we accept the idea of basic life being seeded   across the galaxy,  but also it has the right conditions to evolve some life forms of a home grown variety.   While some doubt has now been raised, IF that is water causing landforms on mars, then it is highly likely that some forms of life exist there.

Titan, Europa, Venus, Callisto and Ganymede   are other likely sites for life, just in our solar system 

We are now discovering dozens, if not hundreds, of planets around our  near galactic neighbourhood which are in the Goldilocks zone and which can thus probably support earth- type life forms.  

[Illyrius]

10 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

They will probably be simple life forms but there existence is highly probable.

Why simple?

[Mr Walker]

2 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

The new animals appear to have modified versions of mitochondria called hydrogenosomes, which can produce ATP without oxygen. Hydrogenosomes were previously known only in single-celled organisms.

can you explain this Walker?

alot of scientific jargon here.

ATP

adenosine triphosphate; a nucleotide found in the mitochondria of all plant and animal cells. It is the major source of energy for cellular reactions, this energy being released during its conversion to ADP. Formula: C 10 H 16 N 5 O 13 P 3

 

huh?

 I am not a scientist, but using a reasonable vocabulary it simply means that evolution branched out a long time ago, creating life forms which did not need to breathe. However,  because we have such a rich atmosphere, the lines of evolution which proved most successful, did utilise breathing to survive   In simple terms it involves genetic adaptations.    Basically, mitochondria produce energy for cellular growth  This energy is usually sourced from  breathing but it can have other sources  

hyrdogenosomes   actually produce  hydrogen. They seem to have evolved from  mitochondria where the mitochondria have lost their  aero biosis qualities (ie their abilty  to sustain life via oxygen intake) and thus created animals which do not require atmosphere (oxygen) to survive   

Function. The most prominent roles of mitochondria are to produce the energy currency of the cell, ATP (i.e., phosphorylation of ADP), through respiration, and to regulate cellular metabolism. The central set of reactions involved in ATP production are collectively known as the citric acid cycle, or the Kre

Hydrogenosomes are approximately 1 micrometre in diameter but under stress conditions can reach up to 2 micrometre ^[5] and are so called because they produce molecular hydrogen. Like mitochondria, they are bound by distinct double membranes and one has an inner membrane with some cristae-like projections. Hydrogenosomes have evolved from mitochondria by loss of aerobiosis-related features in several lineages (not all hydrogenosomes are directly related).^[6] In most cases, hydrogenosomes are genomeless, though genomes have persisted in some lineages such as Neocallimastix, Trichomonas vaginalis or Tritrichomonas foetus

[Mr Walker]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Why simple?

Otherwise they would have evolved and invaded earth  

More complex organisms would be more visible, and we would have discovered them on mars by now. Eg it is easy to spot a plant but hard to spot a bacteria 

Statistically there are many more simple organisms than complex ones, and there is a pyramidal hierarchy of complexity.  So it is always more common to find simple life forms than complex ones  

Edited December 7, 2017 by Mr Walker