where did human's come from? (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

For sake of argument lets say the earth is 5 billion years old and evidence of life is the past 3 billion years (both are off a bit in your favor) . So in the first two billion years life came to be at least once and maybe more often, but it hasn't happened again in the past 3 billion years. Unless the argument is that the existence of life itself anywhere on the planet so alters the conditions that it thwarts the emergence of new life then I'm sorry but this explanation (and even mine) are not very satisfactory.

How do you know it hasn't happened again in the past three billion years? It may have happened thousands of times. It just keeps getting eaten as soon as it pops up because, you know, life forms are quite tasty.

There was nobody around to eat the life that abiogenesised itself into existence three billion years ago. But ever since then, predators have abounded.

 

[MC Gas Money]

For sake of argument lets say the earth is 5 billion years old and evidence of life is the past 3 billion years (both are off a bit in your favor) . So in the first two billion years life came to be at least once and maybe more often, but it hasn't happened again in the past 3 billion years. Unless the argument is that the existence of life itself anywhere on the planet so alters the conditions that it thwarts the emergence of new life then I'm sorry but this explanation (and even mine) are not very satisfactory.

How do you know it hasn't happened again in the past three billion years? It may have happened thousands of times. It just keeps getting eaten as soon as it pops up because, you know, life forms are quite tasty.

There was nobody around to eat the life that abiogenesised itself into existence three billion years ago. But ever since then, predators have abounded.

It could be happening all around us but how would we know or be able to recognize it?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

For sake of argument lets say the earth is 5 billion years old and evidence of life is the past 3 billion years (both are off a bit in your favor) . So in the first two billion years life came to be at least once and maybe more often, but it hasn't happened again in the past 3 billion years. Unless the argument is that the existence of life itself anywhere on the planet so alters the conditions that it thwarts the emergence of new life then I'm sorry but this explanation (and even mine) are not very satisfactory.

How do you know it hasn't happened again in the past three billion years? It may have happened thousands of times. It just keeps getting eaten as soon as it pops up because, you know, life forms are quite tasty.

There was nobody around to eat the life that abiogenesised itself into existence three billion years ago. But ever since then, predators have abounded.

So instead of wondering what I'm missing thinking "All life on Earth came from one common ancestor" is completely inconsistent with the idea that "life is ubiquitous" I should embrace it? Then why don't you guys just say so?

 

[cstu]

For sake of argument lets say the earth is 5 billion years old and evidence of life is the past 3 billion years (both are off a bit in your favor) . So in the first two billion years life came to be at least once and maybe more often, but it hasn't happened again in the past 3 billion years. Unless the argument is that the existence of life itself anywhere on the planet so alters the conditions that it thwarts the emergence of new life then I'm sorry but this explanation (and even mine) are not very satisfactory.

How do you know it hasn't happened again in the past three billion years? It may have happened thousands of times. It just keeps getting eaten as soon as it pops up because, you know, life forms are quite tasty.

There was nobody around to eat the life that abiogenesised itself into existence three billion years ago. But ever since then, predators have abounded.

So instead of wondering what I'm missing thinking "All life on Earth came from one common ancestor" is completely inconsistent with the idea that "life is ubiquitous" I should embrace it? Then why don't you guys just say so?

My opinion is that life is created frequently but needs special conditions to thrive. So it's quite possible for life to be ubiquitous but at the same time for us to only have one common ancestor.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

For sake of argument lets say the earth is 5 billion years old and evidence of life is the past 3 billion years (both are off a bit in your favor) . So in the first two billion years life came to be at least once and maybe more often, but it hasn't happened again in the past 3 billion years. Unless the argument is that the existence of life itself anywhere on the planet so alters the conditions that it thwarts the emergence of new life then I'm sorry but this explanation (and even mine) are not very satisfactory.

How do you know it hasn't happened again in the past three billion years? It may have happened thousands of times. It just keeps getting eaten as soon as it pops up because, you know, life forms are quite tasty.

There was nobody around to eat the life that abiogenesised itself into existence three billion years ago. But ever since then, predators have abounded.

So instead of wondering what I'm missing thinking "All life on Earth came from one common ancestor" is completely inconsistent with the idea that "life is ubiquitous" I should embrace it? Then why don't you guys just say so?

My opinion is that life is created frequently but needs special conditions to thrive. So it's quite possible for life to be ubiquitous but at the same time for us to only have one common ancestor.

If by "us" you mean complex multi-cell life forms then that is pretty sensible Lots of things can wrong during that rather long period of time, especially if there is competition. Sure I'm being nit picky over the "all life" but it seems to me that this cannot be the case without making the emergence of life an exception rather than the rule.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

It could be happening all around us but how would we know or be able to recognize it?

Are you suggesting that we can only recognize life that is similar to our own, or that at the single cell level it would be pretty hard to distinguish the difference. The former would have all kinds of implications.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Well after there is the first wave of bacteria and predatory organisms, it's not so easy for the second wave to just magically appear and plant their little 2nd amoeba flag.

But my point doesn't need that second amoeba to thrive or even survive very long, merely exist at all, I'd suspect that if life emerged regularly that it would more often than not be ill suited to survive any environment other than the temporary one where it appeared. That most won't last long enough to adapt for any other environment, or even survive long enough to be dinner.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

How do we know that life isn't arising deep inside a thermal vent in the ocean?

Maybe I should ask the University College London - UCL. They are the one's that said "all".

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Other than the sea vents mentioned above what part of Earth is still even close to primordial?

Not sure. If life emerging extremely rare and dependent on very precise conditions and luck, or is it extremely common and happens whenever some set of conditions are present. Sure the answer is somewhere in the middle, but from the quotes in the ordinary press and media it seems that the vocal consensus at least is with it being much closer to the latter. Again I readily admit that my knowledge of current events in biology is limited.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Other than the sea vents mentioned above what part of Earth is still even close to primordial?

twin cities area brohan

Favorite vacation spot?

 

[MC Gas Money]

It could be happening all around us but how would we know or be able to recognize it?

Are you suggesting that we can only recognize life that is similar to our own, or that at the single cell level it would be pretty hard to distinguish the difference. The former would have all kinds of implications.

Im saying we would have to be watching a puddle of water and minerals 24/7 to see if life just appeared . That sounds difficult to do.

 

[joffer]

Here you go, extra-terrestrial life - http://www.iflscience.com/space/marine-plankton-found-surface-international-space-station