XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.religion.christian, alt.russian.z1   
   From: os333@netc.eu   
      
   Dawn Flood,    
   > On 9/18/2025 8:13 PM, Oleg Smirnov wrote:   
   >> JTEM,    
      
   > It's right here:   
   >   
   > https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/research/life-detection/about/   
   >   
   > "A self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution".   
      
   In no way it may be accepted as an accurate definition of life.   
      
   Every/either system is chemical (as well as physical etc) system,   
   so chemical-ness doesn't represent any informative specificity.   
   What means "self-sustaining" - itself needs to be defined. And in   
   order to make Darwinian evolution out one would need time much   
   much longer than the characteristic lifespans of living organisms,   
   including humans, so they would be unable to somehow employ this   
   "definition" practically to define (see) life or non-life.   
      
   NASA honestly state there that "for generations the definition of   
   life has eluded scientists and philosophers", but they pretend   
   dishonestly they have managed to somehow cope with this elusion.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)