No life outside earth

[vooke]

There are billions of earth like objects in our infinite universe. Relazy. Evolution is solid science. The foundation of any modern life science.

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

[vooke]

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

There are billions of earth like objects in our infinite universe. Relazy. Evolution is solid science. The foundation of any modern life science.

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

[vooke]

[vooke]

There are billions of earth like objects in our infinite universe. Relazy. Evolution is solid science. The foundation of any modern life science.

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

Guesswork/chemical evolution is not science.

Let's try this. What makes nothing-dirt-Termie science?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I don't understand what this even means.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

Guesswork is not science.

Let's try this. What makes nothing-dirt-Termie science?

No.  Guesswork is guesswork.  Is it used in science?  Sometimes.  Like I mentioned, doing real science is like playing a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces.

The difference with science is when they are guessing(educated or otherwise) they don't call it divine revelation.

What's the meaning of your last question?

[vooke]

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

Guesswork is not science.

Let's try this. What makes nothing-dirt-Termie science?

No.  Guesswork is guesswork.  Is it used in science?  Sometimes.  Like I mentioned, doing real science is like playing a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces.

The difference with science is when they are guessing(educated or otherwise) they don't call it divine revelation.

What's the meaning of your last question?

Chemical evolution is spontaneous generation which was discredited before evolution was conceived


What makes chemical evolution science and not religion?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

Guesswork is not science.

Let's try this. What makes nothing-dirt-Termie science?

No.  Guesswork is guesswork.  Is it used in science?  Sometimes.  Like I mentioned, doing real science is like playing a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces.

The difference with science is when they are guessing(educated or otherwise) they don't call it divine revelation.

What's the meaning of your last question?

Chemical evolution is spontaneous generation which was discredited before evolution was conceived


What makes chemical evolution science and not religion?

Even assuming that your claim is correct, and that chemical evolution is discredited.  So what?  It's the best information at the moment.  When better evidence emerges, it might indeed turn out to be wrong replaced by a totally different mechanism.  That is what makes it science.

A more clearer example.  Dark matter.  Nobody has seen it.  But it is hypothesized because it preserves what is currently the best model of the universe so far.  When something better comes up, general relativity is not infallible, and can be refined if not discarded entirely.

[vooke]

It's a scientific theory, not an "established" fact.  Scientific theories are inherently tentative(fluid), open to challenges, and discarded when a new theory with superior explanatory power presents itself.  It's a bit like putting together a huge jigsaw puzzle, with many pieces missing. 

Guesswork is not science.

Let's try this. What makes nothing-dirt-Termie science?

No.  Guesswork is guesswork.  Is it used in science?  Sometimes.  Like I mentioned, doing real science is like playing a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces.

The difference with science is when they are guessing(educated or otherwise) they don't call it divine revelation.

What's the meaning of your last question?

Chemical evolution is spontaneous generation which was discredited before evolution was conceived


What makes chemical evolution science and not religion?

Even assuming that your claim is correct, and that chemical evolution is discredited.  So what?  It's the best information at the moment.  When better evidence emerges, it might indeed turn out to be wrong replaced by a totally different mechanism.  That is what makes it science.

A more clearer example.  Dark matter.  Nobody has seen it.  But it is hypothesized because it preserves what is currently the best model of the universe so far.  When something better comes up, general relativity is not infallible, and can be refined if not discarded entirely.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

15 billion years ago we had nothing but hydrogen, time and energy.
10 billion years later hydrogen had formed all other elements and we had hydrogen, ammonia, oxygen, water
Out of these, organic molecules which are necessary for life emerged. Amino acids, sugars, nucleotides. These formed longer chains or polymers. Sugars formed starch, amino acids formed proteins, nucleotides firmed DNA.
Then magically, these three formed living cells. This is pure conjecture. Probability of such just can't be computed. It's too small.

Dark matter is an attempt to explain phenomena that seemingly defies predictions of scientific theories. So there is a distinct possibility of its existence

, but chemical evolution is increasingly discredited by what we know. Every day we are learning of just how complex the simplest cells is, and this pushes probability of chemical evolution even lower. Labs can simulate about every imaginable primordial environment but nothing comes close to demonstrating chemical evolution.

[vooke]

15 billion years ago we had nothing but hydrogen, time and energy.
10 billion years later hydrogen had formed all other elements and we had hydrogen, ammonia, oxygen, water
Out of these, organic molecules which are necessary for life emerged. Amino acids, sugars, nucleotides. These formed longer chains or polymers. Sugars formed starch, amino acids formed proteins, nucleotides firmed DNA.
Then magically, these three formed living cells. This is pure conjecture. Probability of such just can't be computed. It's too small.

Dark matter is an attempt to explain phenomena that seemingly defies predictions of scientific theories. So there is a distinct possibility of its existence

, but chemical evolution is increasingly discredited by what we know. Every day we are learning of just how complex the simplest cells is, and this pushes probability of chemical evolution even lower. Labs can simulate about every imaginable primordial environment but nothing comes close to demonstrating chemical evolution.

A scientist entertaining possibility of iPhones existing anywhere else in this universe other than here in earth is mad. We need not tear the universe apart before concluding that iPhones exist only on earth. Understanding how iPhones got here is all we need to rule out their existence elsewhere.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

15 billion years ago we had nothing but hydrogen, time and energy.
10 billion years later hydrogen had formed all other elements and we had hydrogen, ammonia, oxygen, water
Out of these, organic molecules which are necessary for life emerged. Amino acids, sugars, nucleotides. These formed longer chains or polymers. Sugars formed starch, amino acids formed proteins, nucleotides firmed DNA.
Then magically, these three formed living cells. This is pure conjecture. Probability of such just can't be computed. It's too small.

Dark matter is an attempt to explain phenomena that seemingly defies predictions of scientific theories. So there is a distinct possibility of its existence

, but chemical evolution is increasingly discredited by what we know. Every day we are learning of just how complex the simplest cells is, and this pushes probability of chemical evolution even lower. Labs can simulate about every imaginable primordial environment but nothing comes close to demonstrating chemical evolution.

A scientist entertaining possibility of iPhones existing anywhere else in this universe other than here in earth is mad. We need not tear the universe apart before concluding that iPhones exist only on earth. Understanding how iPhones got here is all we need to rule out their existence elsewhere.

Change that from an iPhone to a generic communication device and it does not sound so mad anymore.

[vooke]

15 billion years ago we had nothing but hydrogen, time and energy.
10 billion years later hydrogen had formed all other elements and we had hydrogen, ammonia, oxygen, water
Out of these, organic molecules which are necessary for life emerged. Amino acids, sugars, nucleotides. These formed longer chains or polymers. Sugars formed starch, amino acids formed proteins, nucleotides firmed DNA.
Then magically, these three formed living cells. This is pure conjecture. Probability of such just can't be computed. It's too small.

Dark matter is an attempt to explain phenomena that seemingly defies predictions of scientific theories. So there is a distinct possibility of its existence

, but chemical evolution is increasingly discredited by what we know. Every day we are learning of just how complex the simplest cells is, and this pushes probability of chemical evolution even lower. Labs can simulate about every imaginable primordial environment but nothing comes close to demonstrating chemical evolution.

A scientist entertaining possibility of iPhones existing anywhere else in this universe other than here in earth is mad. We need not tear the universe apart before concluding that iPhones exist only on earth. Understanding how iPhones got here is all we need to rule out their existence elsewhere.

Change that from an iPhone to a generic communication device and it does not sound so mad anymore.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

[vooke]

The laws of science that operate on earth operate in the entire universe. It is out of these laws that life allegedly accidentally emerged. Claiming that they similarly operated and generated life elsewhere is fantasy

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

The laws of science that operate on earth operate in the entire universe. It is out of these laws that life allegedly accidentally emerged. Claiming that they similarly operated and generated life elsewhere is fantasy

"Laws of science" is an ongoing fluid enterprise.  The search for scientific knowledge does not stop.  100 years from now what we know might turn out to be just as ridiculous as the creationist story.

We don't know if they generated life elsewhere.  That is why there is research on the subject.