I post this here because its shows that the scientific agenda of evolution is one major cause that the consensus of extraterrestrial life isnt taken seriously because the evolution corner claims that all life originated on this planet and they often fight tooth and nail against anything that can show that life might have advanced in any other way other than through evolution... This is a portion of my paper, that many in the evolution corner hates me for writing. (The religious corner might not like this as well ;) ) *********************************************** Evolution is but only ‘one’ way that can show ‘how life advances’. Through the [problem of induction][1], no number of confirming observations can verify a [universal generalization][2], such as Evolution is the only reason for all the diversity of life, yet it is logically possible to falsify it by observing a single instance where evolution did not play a role in the advancement of a single form of life such as something that was genetically manipulated. Can ‘other life’ in the cosmos be falsifiable? Let’s start with the concept of god. The ONLY ‘physical’ fact we can find about the concept of a god that is non-disputed by theists and atheist’s alike, is that this concept comes from literature (the bible) where man created this literary character in a book of literature. Fictional, literary characters are NOT falsifiable because there is nothing physical to analyze scientifically, therefore the “concept” of god does not pass the test of falsifiable and can not be a scientific concept that can be tested. Can the same be said of life in the cosmos? First and foremost, evolution is not about origins. It is about how life can be advanced once life is in existence. Through Boolean logic, Life in the cosmos = True and this is the logic the ToE uses in it’s axiom. Can other life in the cosmos be said to be “Non-existent”, is life in the cosmos falsifiable? It can be said that we know that ‘life’ itself exists (unlike the concept of god) so YES, it can be tested! For example, by the problem of induction, no number of confirming observations can verify a universal generalization, such as “life only exists on planet Earth, yet it is logically possible to falsify it by observing a single instance of life outside our planet. Whether we have that evidence of other life yet is of no consequence. Since the concept of “other life in the cosmos” is a valid scientific concept that is falsifiable, the possibility that other life in the cosmos might have scientifically advanced to the point of genetic manipulation can not be ruled out by the falsified stance that the ToE takes, that evolution must have happened on Earth first to arrive at the point that humans were able to genetically alter life first because life on Earth may have been genetically altered at some time in our past and Evolution has no evidence that evolution alone was responsible for ALL the diversity of life on Earth. I started this ‘post with the heading, “Evolution is but only ‘one’ way that can show ‘how life advances’.” But can it really be stated that Evolution is the ONLY reason for ALL the diversity of life and fossils on the planet? The answer is an astounding NO! Anything other than that answer is fallacy and delusion backing a pseudo-scientific stance through exclusion of shown concept. 1 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction 2 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumerative_induction
Posted on: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 01:55:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015