Is There Life On Mars?

[blarg]

The Bible does not say earth is the only planet in the universe which is not overly hostile to human life, science has said that.

well it says earth is the only planet that we know about that's not hostile

right now we are not good enough at finding small earth sided exoplanets and figuring out the atmosphere and temperatures but giver it time and that might change along with the size of are human friendly list of worlds

 

[marke]

you would have to build a place for human on it if you wanted to live there true

Maybe rocket scientists are unaware of how much goes into building anything, even on earth, not to mention on Mars.

oxygen exists at both places it was created from long dead stars

No need for space suits with oxygen packs on Mars? I did not know that.

if you mean o2 in the atmosphere microbes gave the earth that and it caused a mass extinction

The flood caused a mass extinction which is evidenced in the fossil record worldwide, but atheists do not want to believe God flooded the earth so they blame those mass extinctions on things like asteroids and microbes and maybe a hundred other unprovable speculations.

mars had water but its core solidified killing tis magnetic field and elting the solar winds blow away most of its atmosphere

Really? I must have missed the BBC special on that. Did they get the facts captured on film in actual scientific observation when it happened or is this just another speculation fleshed out with graphics like so many other assumptions being promoted to a gullible world as actual science?

we have got about billion years before the expansion of the sun renders this rock uninhabitable for life humans or there descendants are going to need to build themselves new homes at some point if they want to live

I would recommend you forget the number "billion" and try to focus on the fact that you probably have no more than 70 years left in which to plan for your eternity with or without God.

 

[marke]

well it says earth is the only planet that we know about that's not hostile

right now we are not good enough at finding small earth sided exoplanets and figuring out the atmosphere and temperatures but giver it time and that might change along with the size of are human friendly list of worlds

Maybe one of Crick's original life panspermia spaceships will show back up and aliens will inform us of life somewhere in the universe beyond human ability to observe and record.

 

[blarg]

Maybe rocket scientists are unaware of how much goes into building anything, even on earth, not to mention on Mars.



No need for space suits with oxygen packs on Mars? I did not know that.



The flood caused a mass extinction which is evidenced in the fossil record worldwide, but atheists do not want to believe God flooded the earth so they blame those mass extinctions on things like asteroids and microbes and maybe a hundred other unprovable speculations.



Really? I must have missed the BBC special on that. Did they get the facts captured on film in actual scientific observation when it happened or is this just another speculation fleshed out with graphics like so many other assumptions being promoted to a gullible world as actual science?



I would recommend you forget the number "billion" and try to focus on the fact that you probably have no more than 70 years left in which to plan for your eternity with or without God.

not sure evidence of a flood based mass extinction have been found or eviden for a worldwide flood and 1 flood would not cause multiple mass extinctions over time

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44952710

https://www.space.com/17048-water-on-mars.html


people dont seem to exist forever gods don't seem to exist at all so not sure how i can plan for that

 

[blarg]

Maybe one of Crick's original life panspermia spaceships will show back up and aliens will inform us of life somewhere in the universe beyond human ability to observe and record.

um who?

 

[marke]

not sure evidence of a flood based mass extinction have been found or eviden for a worldwide flood and 1 flood would not cause multiple mass extinctions over time

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44952710

https://www.space.com/17048-water-on-mars.html


people dont seem to exist forever gods don't seem to exist at all so not sure how i can plan for that

Almost all if not all fossils were buried by flood sediments. That must cause the atheist crowd some discomfort. They think it is wise to say 'God must not exist,' as if that makes any sense at all. But they are, like Richard Dawkins, convinced there is no afterlife, even though Hawking has already gone to the other side and found out differently.

 

[blarg]

Almost all if not all fossils were buried by flood sediments. That must cause the atheist crowd some discomfort. They think it is wise to say 'God must not exist,' as if that makes any sense at all. But they are, like Richard Dawkins, convinced there is no afterlife, even though Hawking has already gone to the other side and found out differently.

source?

 

[marke]

um who?

Francis Crick. Awarded the Nobel science prize for his study of DNA. Also noted for explaining that life could not have started on earth spontaneously because to build cells would require a miracle according to our understanding of scientific reality. But Crick did not acknowledge the obvious, that life on earth was created by a miracle of God. Instead, he came up with the idea that aliens on spaceships came to earth and sprinkled biologic dust into the atmosphere which resulted in the origin of life on earth.

That was just a theory, of course, and a dumb one at that. I find it much easier to believe the miracle causing the origin of life on earth was performed by God.

 

[marke]

source?

Start with high school science and see if we can help add to that later.

 

[blarg]

Start with high school science and see if we can help add to that later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil


is it on this page and im just missing it?

 

[blarg]

Start with high school science and see if we can help add to that later.

got water environment on this one but it dosent say flood

https://www.britannica.com/science/fossil

 

[marke]

got water environment on this one but it dosent say flood

https://www.britannica.com/science/fossil

Right. Most secular publications do not like to mention the word "flood" due to secular bias against God. The article you posted does refer to permineralization and to the fact that soft tissues in animals turned to fossils are rarely preserved. That is because soft tissues cannot last the millions of years scientists speculate some fossils have been buried. However, recent finds of un-permineralized soft tissues in dinosaur fossils has turned old secular ideas about the ages of dinosaur fossils upside down.

 

[blarg]

Right. Most secular publications do not like to mention the word "flood" due to secular bias against God. The article you posted does refer to permineralization and to the fact that soft tissues in animals turned to fossils are rarely preserved. That is because soft tissues cannot last the millions of years scientists speculate some fossils have been buried. However, recent finds of un-permineralized soft tissues in dinosaur fossils has turned old secular ideas about the ages of dinosaur fossils upside down.

ok you need all fossils to form in a giant flood for you sorry to work out not seeing where and by what that story is being backed up

 

[blarg]

ok you need all fossils to form in a giant flood for you sorry to work out not seeing where and by what that story is being backed up

sigh

try it again

ok you need all fossils to form in a giant flood for your story to work out not seeing where and by what that story is being backed up

 

[zyzygy]

Almost all if not all fossils were buried by flood sediments. That must cause the atheist crowd some discomfort. They think it is wise to say 'God must not exist,' as if that makes any sense at all. But they are, like Richard Dawkins, convinced there is no afterlife, even though Hawking has already gone to the other side and found out differently.

So Hawking has contacted you?

 

[zyzygy]

Right. Most secular publications do not like to mention the word "flood" due to secular bias against God. The article you posted does refer to permineralization and to the fact that soft tissues in animals turned to fossils are rarely preserved. That is because soft tissues cannot last the millions of years scientists speculate some fossils have been buried. However, recent finds of un-permineralized soft tissues in dinosaur fossils has turned old secular ideas about the ages of dinosaur fossils upside down.

Nonsense.

 

[zyzygy]

Francis Crick. Awarded the Nobel science prize for his study of DNA. Also noted for explaining that life could not have started on earth spontaneously because to build cells would require a miracle according to our understanding of scientific reality. But Crick did not acknowledge the obvious, that life on earth was created by a miracle of God. Instead, he came up with the idea that aliens on spaceships came to earth and sprinkled biologic dust into the atmosphere which resulted in the origin of life on earth.

That was just a theory, of course, and a dumb one at that. I find it much easier to believe the miracle causing the origin of life on earth was performed by God.

Only if you believe in magic. I'll stick with reality.

 

[zyzygy]

I'm not talking about the Garden of Eden... that's a parable.

I'm just talking about the sequence of events that led up to the creation of man. Obviously, it's not a science paper... it was written in the 6th Century BC, and for the time it is remarkably prescient for how science would (much) later come to understand creation.

I disagree.

 

[zyzygy]

The Bible does not say earth is the only planet in the universe which is not overly hostile to human life, science has said that.

Nope. Science has not said that. See the Kepler results.

Kepler Telescope Finds 20 Earth-Like Planets Potentially Capable Of Hosting Life

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/...-planets-potentially-capable-hosting-life.htm

 

[RAMOSS]

It was a singularity, the one involved in the Big Bang. That one. Don't you know what a singularity is?

A singularity is a place where our math breaks down so we can describe the conditions. It is a fancy way of saying 'We don't know enough to describe it'

 

[RAMOSS]

um who?

The discoverer of DNA, who promoted the idea of panspermia. It however, is incorrect that he promoted the concept of space aliens purposely seeding the planet.

 

[RAMOSS]

Almost all if not all fossils were buried by flood sediments. That must cause the atheist crowd some discomfort. They think it is wise to say 'God must not exist,' as if that makes any sense at all. But they are, like Richard Dawkins, convinced there is no afterlife, even though Hawking has already gone to the other side and found out differently.

Uh... please provide a source for this claim. Please explain why , for example, there are layers of desert between layers of sea sediment in the walls of the grand cannon, where there are fossilized footprints in sandstone, where fossils from a sea bed are both below it and above it. Describe the mechnism that a 'global flood' would case that pattern.

 

[zyzygy]

Uh... please provide a source for this claim. Please explain why , for example, there are layers of desert between layers of sea sediment in the walls of the grand cannon, where there are fossilized footprints in sandstone, where fossils from a sea bed are both below it and above it. Describe the mechnism that a 'global flood' would case that pattern.

I bet you get the answer "science doesn't say that". Science knows that not all fossils are buried under flood sediments but reality has nothing to do with religious belief.

 

[Rich2018]

Almost all if not all fossils were buried by flood sediments....

No they weren't

(even if you claim they really were and their locations were covered up by anti-god science journals and peer papers)

...that must cause the atheist crowd some discomfort....

Surprisingly it doesn't

...they think it is wise to say 'God must not exist,' as if that makes any sense at all....

No, what doesn't make sense is a blind addiction to a religious story, written thousands of years ago, without the slightest evidence at all.


Indeed an addition to a god in the FACE of all the evidence ever collated.

...but they are, like Richard Dawkins, convinced there is no afterlife, even though Hawking has already gone to the other side and found out differently.

Stephen Hawking has been resurrected and sought you out to tell you this ?

 

[zyzygy]

No they weren't

(even if you claim they really were and their locations were covered up by anti-god science journals and peer papers)




Surprisingly it doesn't




No, what doesn't make sense is a blind addiction to a religious story, written thousands of years ago, without the slightest evidence at all.


Indeed an addition to a god in the FACE of all the evidence ever collated.







Stephen Hawking has been resurrected and sought you out to tell you this ?

I would like an answer to that.