He cites a string of remarkable discoveries:
While life is a special kind of complex chemistry, the elements involved are nothing special: carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and so on are among the most abundant elements in the universe. Complex organic chemistry is surprisingly common.
Amino acids, just like those that make up every protein in our bodies, have been found in the tails of comets. There are other organic compounds in Martian soil.
And 6,500 light years away a giant cloud of space alcohol floats among the stars … A second independent “tree of life” would mean that the rapid appearance of life on Earth was no fluke; life must abound in the universe.
It would greatly increase the chances that, somewhere among those billions of habitable planets in our galaxy, there could be something we could talk to… Cathal D. O’Connell, “Why the idea of alien life now seems inevitable and possibly imminent” at The Conversation
O’Connell sets out a great deal of evidence for the possibility of life but, of course, the reality is that “something we could talk to” is the real prize. Bacteria on Jupiter’s moon Europa or on an exoplanets would be a sensation for a couple of years but if nothing of greater significance followed for decades … well… life goes on.
He ends with, “The ancient question ‘Are we alone?’ has graduated from being a philosophical musing to a testable hypothesis. We should be prepared for an answer.”
Actually, our culture has buzzed about the possibility, waiting for an answer, for decades; some of us remember it from the Fifties. So it’s worth asking another question: What if, after decades of research, no answer comes? What would that change?
Follow UD News at Twitter!
See also: Faint hopes easily revived: Life may be evolving on closest exoplanet
Forbes cosmology commentator: Maybe we ARE alone
Still no space aliens? That’s because they are keeping us in a zoo!
and
Tales of an invented god
Well, there is this problem that a series of negatives often does not tell the theoretician very much new information.
That is, A+B might equal C, or not. A hundred examples of A and B still leaves open the chance that B(101) MIGHT yield a different result.
But of course a whole lotta late 19th century theories REQUIRED the existence of Aether. And once Aether was abandoned (how do you REALLY prove a thing “wrong”?), ALL of those theories collapsed.
But the current frenzy suggests that we are looking at a THEOLOGICAL dilemma, not a Scientific one. An unbiased observer would go with the “manipulated universe, intelligent design of Life” until some substantial body of opposing FACTS (rather than desperate BELIEFS) appears. We can ALWAYS drop the theory and go with a better one, but it appears that accidental creation and random Darwinism don’t actually work.
I believe somebody on this site maybe very good point
I don’t remember who this is but I am stealing this quote
“ Either extraterrestrial life is the most Eco conscientious lifeforms in existence or there are no ET’s”
It’s a silly statement but it’s very true. yes there might be unintelligent life somewhere on another planet that got there viva comet, but the fact that no ancient spacefaring alien civilization left any trace of its existence through space trash or any other type of trash seems kind of odd ball.
Yes we live in a very large universe and we happen to be blessed to be on a planet with a very clear view of things, but it is striking that if finding ET IS Inevitable then it’s evidence should be absolutely everywhere and we do know what we’re looking for and it is very testable.
But the moment one invokes that they are so advanced that “We just can’t find them they are hiding from us with their crazy tech” (why not sure) then please keep in mind that many people believe in supernatural beings for almost literally the same reason. It’s a matter of tastes at that point. So you have
An alien being with Reality bending technology so advanced that we can’t comprehend it or reality bending being so advanced we can’t comprehend it.
Both are untestable until the being using the tech or the power reveals its self. Both could exist
wishful thinking typical of a religious dogmatic in denial of ID, and the One designer/creator. That we are special comes w/ responsibility.
reference the Moshe Emes series for understanding science that falsifies all deep-time dependent scientific hypotheses and assumptions such as SCM-LCDM, the Copernican Principle modern cosmology is built upon and of course NDT Darwinism.
So no time for life to evolve NDT style on this or any other planet.
The main false presupposition in the article is the fallacious notion that life is not so special in the universe. This is nothing new. Atheists having tried to claim that life, particularly human life, should not be considered special in the universe for a long time. In the field of cosmology, they have historically done this via the Copernican principle and/or the principle of mediocrity. Yet the Copernican principle and/or the principle of mediocrity has now been, in no uncertain terms, overturned by several lines of evidence. Including lines of evidence that come from none other than two of our most powerful theories in science. i.e. Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity:
I would consider having the two most powerful theories in science, i.e. Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, disagreeing with your main presupposition, i.e. with the Copernican principle, to be overwhelming scientific evidence that your atheistic presupposition must be false. But hey, its only science right!
The second supposedly scientific method in which atheists have tried to undermine the belief that humans are special in this universe is via the false narrative of human evolution. Yet, despite what atheists may believe, the purported scientific evidence for human evolution is far more illusory, even deceptive, than they falsely imagine it to be
And again, hey, it’s only science right?
i.e. In so far as we are apt to follow the scientific evidence where it leads, we find that humanity is not nearly as inconsequential in this universe as atheists would have us believe beforehand.
surprisingly relevant: