home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.agnosticism      A religion for those who hate religion?      213,516 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 212,745 of 213,516   
   "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. to Wm. Esque   
   Re: no evidence for abiogenesis?   
   03 May 16 16:26:02   
   
   XPost: alt.atheism, alt.philosophy, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: Esque"@gmail.com   
      
   On 5/3/2016 4:15 PM, Wm. Esque wrote:   
   > On 5/3/2016 6:01 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:   
   >> In article ,   
   >>  "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 5/2/2016 12:24 PM, Malcolm McMahon wrote:   
   >>>> Dale  wrote:   
   >>>>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 14:44:36 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> "If life arose relatively quickly on Earth Š then it could be   
   >>>>>> common in   
   >>>>>> the   
   >>>>>> universe."[38]   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> didn't add, life could have always existed, no biogenesis or no   
   >>>>> abiogenesis   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Not easy for life to have existed when the whole planet was a bubbling   
   >>>> molten   
   >>>> blob.   
   >>>>   
   >>> True, there must have been a period when life did not exist on this   
   >>> planet. OTOH, ours is a second or third generation star and solar   
   >>> system. The universe is 13.7 billion years old.   
   >>>>>> The earth and solar system is known to be 4.5 billion years old.   
   >> So the universe existed some 9.2 billion years before the earth   
   >> coalesced from dead stars matter. Life appear on the earth about 3.8   
   >> billion years ago, some 1.5 - 2 billion years after it's formation, then>>>   
   it's not unreasonable to suggest that could life might have appeared   
   >> during the 9.2 billion years prior to our solar system formation. Afte   
   >> arising in a previous generation of stars and solar systems, this life>>>   
   could have migrated to the newly formed earth. This is not scientific   
   >> because it's not testable. Nevertheless, why could it not be a real   
   >> possibility? There are an number of hypothesis suggesting   
   >> that life came from space.   
   >   
   > It makes a whole lot more sense than "goddidit".   
      
   here had to be two types of stars whose explosion created the   
   debris from which the earth and solar system coalesced: a   
   supernova which created heavy matter (above fe.) and a star   
   lower in the main sequence, where iron is the final element   
   created within the star which explodes. There should be remnants  of   
   these stars, ie a brown star or a neutron star, nearby so,   
   where are they? There is a point in space where every 26 million   
   years, average there is a extinction period;   
   sometimes massive extinctions. Ie Ordovician-Silurian, Permian   
   thisaaic-Jurassic.  This is the nemesis (death star) hypothesis.   
   Is it possible this "star" (if it exist) is a remnant of the star   
   explosion which gave up our solar system?   
      
      
      
      
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca