Did life evolve more than once?

[Eldorado]

Has all of life on Earth evolved only once, or are different living beings cut from different cloths? The question of how difficult it is for life to emerge is interesting – not least because it can shed some light on the likelihood of finding life on other planets.

The origin of life is a central question in modern biology, and probably the hardest to study. This event took place four billion years ago, and it happened at a molecular level – meaning little fossil evidence remains.

Many lively beginnings have been suggested, from unsavoury primordial soups to outer space. But the current scientific consensus is that life emerged from non-living molecules in a natural process called abiogenesis, most likely in the darkness of deep-sea hydrothermal vents. But if life emerged once, why not more times?

https://theconversation.com/did-life-evolve-more-than-once-researchers-are-closing-in-on-an-answer-205678

[papageorge1]

My considered position is that the most likely explanation is that physical life was fostered from its inception by higher plane beings (nature spirits). That is beyond current science to prove/disprove but comes from those who I believe have beyond physical plane insight into reality.

[pellinore]

55 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

My considered position is that the most likely explanation is that physical life was fostered from its inception by higher plane beings (nature spirits). That is beyond current science to prove/disprove but comes from those who I believe have beyond physical plane insight into reality.

That sounds like religion.

[papageorge1]

1 minute ago, pellinore said:

That sounds like religion.

Perhaps, but claims of beyond physical insight can suggest ideas for scientific consideration.

Not being a follower of 'Scientism' myself, I personally am interested in science but also what other sources can share on the question.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

My considered position is that the most likely explanation is that physical life was fostered from its inception by higher plane beings (nature spirits). That is beyond current science to prove/disprove but comes from those who I believe have beyond physical plane insight into reality.

So how did those higher beings come to exist ?

[papageorge1]

1 minute ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

So how did those higher beings come to exist ?

In the philosophy I most respect the entire universe is a creative thoughtform of Brahman/God/Source. There are realms from the subtlest dimensions down to the physical realm. So intelligence is inherent from the start and continues top/down from the subtlest realm down to the physical realm.

Now, why does Brahman/God/Source exist? This is a mystery we can't get our heads behind.

 

[zep73]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

In the philosophy I most respect the entire universe is a creative thoughtform of Brahman/God/Source. There are realms from the subtlest dimensions down to the physical realm. So intelligence is inherent from the start and continues top/down from the subtlest realm down to the physical realm.

Now, why does Brahman/God/Source exist? This is a mystery we can't get our heads behind.

 

I'm curious. If you don't mind me asking. Are you of Indian* descend, or did you choose to become a Hinduist?

(* not to be confused with Native American.)

Edited May 21 by zep73

[Piney]

49 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I'm curious. If you don't mind me asking. Are you of Indian* descend, or did you choose to become a Hindi?

(* not to be confused with Native American.)

He's a American Theosophist.....

[papageorge1]

58 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I'm curious. If you don't mind me asking. Are you of Indian* descend, or did you choose to become a Hinduist?

(* not to be confused with Native American.)

White American raised Catholic but searcher for truth in spirit. 
 

I now believe India is the home of mankind’s deepest spiritual philosophy. Beyond Abrahamic religions and scientific materialism.

[papageorge1]

21 minutes ago, Piney said:

He's an American Theosophist.....

Advaita Vedanta follower learning from Theosophical and Hindu material.

[Alchopwn]

6 hours ago, Eldorado said:

Many lively beginnings have been suggested, from unsavoury primordial soups to outer space. But the current scientific consensus is that life emerged from non-living molecules in a natural process called abiogenesis, most likely in the darkness of deep-sea hydrothermal vents. But if life emerged once, why not more times?

The oldest fossils of the oldest life forms we know of are found in rocks in Western Australia afaik.  These suggest that life emerged from tidal rockpools.  Much revolves around the issue of the first proteins, specifically peptides and amino acids.

[Piney]

7 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

The oldest fossils of the oldest life forms we know of are found in rocks in Western Australia afaik.  These suggest that life emerged from tidal rockpools.  Much revolves around the issue of the first proteins, specifically peptides and amino acids.

Stromatolites can also be found in New Jersey and New York but I think they are slightly younger.

 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

12 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

In the philosophy I most respect the entire universe is a creative thoughtform of Brahman/God/Source. There are realms from the subtlest dimensions down to the physical realm. So intelligence is inherent from the start and continues top/down from the subtlest realm down to the physical realm.

Now, why does Brahman/God/Source exist? This is a mystery we can't get our heads behind.

 

How do you explain that we have a fossil record that goes back almost 4 billion years before humans existed ? 

If we were created by a creative thoughform (Whatever that means) there shouln't be a need for a fossil record should there ?

So there is evidence for gradual evolution and no evidence for a higher realm, yet you believe in something that have no explanation. Why ? 

[papageorge1]

5 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

How do you explain that we have a fossil record that goes back almost 4 billion years before humans existed ? 

If we were created by a creative thoughform (Whatever that means) there shouln't be a need for a fossil record should there ?

So there is evidence for gradual evolution and no evidence for a higher realm, yet you believe in something that have no explanation. Why ? 

You misunderstand my position. I have no disagreement with any fossil record. I was talking about abiogenesis involving beings of the higher plane of nature as well as their fostering of the entire evolutionary process. 

The entire universe and all its planes is a thought-form of fundamental consciousness Brahman/God/Source.

[Abramelin]

I need more beer.

[Piney]

2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

I need more beer.

I need to steal some of Jay's smoke....

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

8 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

You misunderstand my position. I have no disagreement with any fossil record.

I'm pleasantly surprised to hear that.

8 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I was talking about abiogenesis involving beings of the higher plane of nature as well as their fostering of the entire evolutionary process. 

The entire universe and all its planes is a thought-form of fundamental consciousness Brahman/God/Source.

Do you have empirical evidence that supports any of this ?

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

4 hours ago, Abramelin said:

I need more beer.

Here you go:

 

[papageorge1]

8 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

 

Do you have empirical evidence that supports any of this ?

That’s not possible because the sources are not directly detectable by the physical senses and instruments. These things are told of by those with alleged clairvoyant and mystical insight.

Imperfect evidence is the seemingly near impossibility of DNA forming from chance that can produce life with such mind boggling complexity.

[Mr Guitar]

48 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

That’s not possible because the sources are not directly detectable by the physical senses and instruments. These things are told of by those with alleged clairvoyant and mystical insight.

Imperfect evidence is the seemingly near impossibility of DNA forming from chance that can produce life with such mind boggling complexity.

Makes about as much sense as the Flying Spaghetti Monster/Pastafarianism or that tribe in the Pacific that worships a wooden model of a WWII airplane. So you're saying that your sources are not detectable except through the teachings of those with alleged clairvoyant and mystical insight. Brother, if I'm going to put any stock in such theories, I want something a little more substantial than alleged. Are they clairvoyant or not and can their alleged powers be scientifically proven? Where are these other mystical planes - give us a clue or GPS coordinates or something. At least give us something that can be substantiated. Faith is just hoping for good luck which may or may not pan out.

Edited May 23 by Mr Guitar

[+joc]

On 5/21/2023 at 3:19 PM, papageorge1 said:

Perhaps, but claims of beyond physical insight can suggest ideas for scientific consideration.

  No, claims of such suggest nothing for scientific consideration.  Claims of 'beyond physical insight' are just reverbed nonsense from religious texts.

[papageorge1]

2 minutes ago, Mr Guitar said:

Makes about as much sense as the Flying Spaghetti Monster/Pastafarianism or that tribe in the Pacific that worships a wooden model of a WWII airplane. So you're saying that your sources are not detectable except through the teachings of those with alleged clairvoyant and mystical insight. Brother, if I'm going to put any stock in such theories, I want something a little more substantial than alleged. Are they clairvoyant or not and can their alleged powers be scientifically proven? Where are these other mystical planes - give us a clue or GPS coordinates or something. At least give us something that can be substantiated. Faith is just hoping for good luck which may or may not pan out.

Considering the mystery of life itself and consciousness and all things paranormal/psychic I follow the best explanatory model I have heard. Given the paranormal/psychic evidence I do believe these explanatory models are on the right track and can tell us more than we can know through the physical senses.

 

[+joc]

57 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

That’s not possible because the sources are not directly detectable by the physical senses and instruments. These things are told of by those with alleged clairvoyant and mystical insight.

Imperfect evidence is the seemingly near impossibility of DNA forming from chance that can produce life with such mind boggling complexity.

You should really stay on subjects you are comfortable with.   Like ghosts, and things from unknown dimensions.  Science is not one of them obviously.  Where did you get, 'the near impossibility of dna forming from chance...'   You didn't think that up yourself did you?  No, you watched some groovy trending you tube video no doubt...and then glommed on to it.  

 

[papageorge1]

Just now, joc said:

  No, claims of such suggest nothing for scientific consideration.  Claims of 'beyond physical insight' are just reverbed nonsense from religious texts.

Well, I believe psychic/clairvoyant people can perceive real things not detectable by the physical senses. Enough psychic/paranormal evidence has caused me to take this position. Some clairvoyants of Theosophical and Vedic (Hindu) traditions have studied these things and provide rather detailed accounts.

You may call it 'reverbed nonsense from religious texts'.

[papageorge1]

1 minute ago, joc said:

  Where did you get, 'the near impossibility of dna forming from chance...'   You didn't think that up yourself did you?  

 

Actually, it was my own wording just typing on the fly. I understand it's a complex unsolved debate.