Refuting The Laws of Physics, Part 2 of 2

Townhall.com ^ | February 9, 2015 | Mark Baisley

[SunkenCiv]

• Refuting The Laws of Physics, Part 1 of 2

Thanks Kaslin.

· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·

Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·

[SunkenCiv]

• Refuting The Laws of Physics, Part 1 of 2

Thanks Kaslin.

---

· String Theory Ping List ·

---

---

· Join · Bookmark · Topics · Google ·
· View or Post in 'blog · post a topic · subscribe ·

---

[G Larry]

I will have to congratulate Mark at tomorrow nights GOP County meeting.

We have a great opportunity to continue the trend set this weekend in Colorado, by installing Liberty minded Conservatives.

[raybbr]

I showed slides of the lifeless conditions everywhere, with the exception of our home planet. Not surprisingly, there is no self-actualizing taking place on Mars, nor anywhere else as far as can be credibly conjectured.

"Everywhere"? Is he saying there is no life other than earth in the entire universe? Are we to apply the same standards to his seeming assertion of "settled science" that we do to the global warming alarmists or does he get a pass?

Isn't his statement akin to "We've recorded higher temperatures on twenty thermometers over the last ten years. We can't read the ones further away so we'll just go with what can see."

[Rebel_Ace]

"...After laying out the hostile conditions of Big Bang debris, I showed slides of the lifeless conditions everywhere, with the exception of our home planet. Not surprisingly, there is no self-actualizing taking place on Mars, nor anywhere else as far as can be credibly conjectured..."

I live in a modest 1000 sq ft home with a 2 car garage, all sitting on a 60 x 200 foot lot. One day, I wondered if there was an intruder on my property. I looked inside the card holder of my wallet, and did not see anyone, so I reasonably concluded there was no possibility of anyone else being on my property.

[Cboldt]

-- Is he saying there is no life other than earth in the entire universe? --

Yep. Although he makes a technical error by saying life is "outside the probability distribution" (technically, no possible series of random events has zero probability - that we are here is at least evidence, if not proof, that intelligent life is possible), I think his reasoning is correct. The probability of even simple life is so low that calling it "impossible as a random event" is not unreasonable. So many improbable things have to line-up, including a relatively non-hostile environment, that the probability of life anywhere else is close to zero, even considering the known vastness of the universe.

[Nifster]

silly title because the laws of physics supports the idea of creation....

[Hugh the Scot]

Yes, "Everywhere". Your argument sprouts from the assumption that there is something to be found.

AGW alarmists assert that there is "something there" when the evidence doesn't support that conclusion. Are you also asserting that there's something there with no evidence to support you?

As to R_A's wallet; it's a silly argument. No. Looking in your wallet and assuming wouldn't be the correct analogue...

Looking everywhere that is accessible within your yard and on your property, and then declaring that there's no one there prior to digging up the soil and sawing all of the trees in half, is a more apt comparison..

[Kaslin]

You’re welcome

[kosciusko51]

The “everywhere” he uses means everywhere we have looked and/or sent probes. We have not found life anywhere else except on Earth.

[raybbr]

AGW alarmists assert that there is "something there" when the evidence doesn't support that conclusion. Are you also asserting that there's something there with no evidence to support you?

No. It's about evidence. At what point do you declare "I've looked at all the evidence". Claiming that there "nothing there" because there is no evidence he can see beyond our solar system derives the finding that there is nothing to be found in the entire Universe is childish at best.

[aquila48]

But considering the immensity of the universe we’ve not even scratched the surface.

[longtermmemmory]

isn’t this more appropriate for the religion thread under ecumenical?

[Senator_Blutarski]

Bump for later reading

[kosciusko51]

Yes, but what we do know about the universe from our solar system and other extraterrestrial pursuits is that the universe is a hostile environment for life.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Is he saying there is no life other than earth in the entire universe?

Can you show us where there is any other?

Until actual evidence of such become available, the assumption that there is life elsewhere is simply wishcasting.

[caligatrux]

Actually, I don't see how life on other planets would detract from his overall argument.

When God created light, he didn't create the sun, or the stars. He created light. All light, everywhere. All suns, all stars... the very possibility of light. When He created the land, He created all land, all planets, everywhere.

Perhaps Earth is just one of the spots of fertile ground among the weeds and stones of the cosmos where life took hold.

[Rebel_Ace]

"...So many improbable things have to line-up, including a relatively non-hostile environment, that the probability of life anywhere else is close to zero, even considering the known vastness of the universe..."

I believe that to be a rather arrogant position, as if you know all the conditions prevalent in our Galaxy, or all the known Galaxies observed.

Just consider "simple" water. What does it take to make it? Two Hydrogen Atoms and one Oxygen Atom you might say. Well, where did the Oxygen come from, if the Universe started off as a smear of mostly Hydrogen and some Helium?

A fairly "ridiculous" chain of nuclear reactions have to take place to produce the Oxygen atoms from the raw material of Hydrogen. How is the matter organized from the simple Hydrogen atom to the more complex Oxygen atom? Does someone have to supervise the order of the reactions to get Oxygen? Nope. Just GRAVITY and TIME, left to "run unattended" will result in Hydrogen clumps forming stars, which through the process of repeated birth, death and recycling, will produce the Oxygen atoms needed to form simple water.

My point? There exist many examples of self assembly and spontaneous order in the natural world. I cannot in all honesty look at a Hubble Deep Field image with countless Galaxies in view, each with Billions of Stars, and even begin to think I know everything about the conditions everywhere in the Universe.

[TexasGator]

“We are symmetrical.”

Some are beautiful, some are ugly. Go figure.