A Premise For Life Existing In The Universe Outside of Earth

Communications Center Out Of Pod Experience
101

Earthquakes don’t move material to the core, they move it between the crust and the mantle, which is a tiny fraction of the earth’s composition. Learn some geology. The core is molten iron. Its ‘fuel’ is gravity and motion; it’s essentially powered by crushing pressures and the spin of the earth.

And sorry, but you don’t get to just call me a troll as if that discredits the information (the facts) that I’m providing for you. Just because they contradict your little preconceived new-age belief system doesn’t mean you get to walk away from these facts without putting on full display your own intellectual dishonesty and inability to admit that you’re just wrong.

By dismissing this information, just because it contradicts what you think is right, you demonstrate you are unwilling to learn. You limit yourself and only yourself that way. Nobody that knows better is going to listen to you. They may ridicule you, and your ideas, because frankly, your ideas are ridiculous, comparable in ridicule to the notion that the earth is flat. The weight of evidence tells us that the existence of the universe precedes that of the existence of life. Sorry, whether you accept it or not, that is a fact.

1 Like
102

Wrong, tectonic plates move material to the core.

Ridge push happens at spreading centers where plates are moving apart. … intense heat in the Earth’s core that causes molten rock in the mantle layer to move.

When the plates are being moved by the heat from the Earth’s core material is deposited back into the Earth’s core that creates pressure and volume expansion within the Earth’s core. The expansion and increase in volume then returns to the surface of the Earth in the form of lava that comes out of volcanoes.

103

The weight of evidence tells us that the existence of the universe precedes that of the existence of life. Sorry, whether you accept it or not, that is a fact.

Prove it.

104

No, they don’t. Again, learn some geology. Doubling down on demonstrable falsehoods and continuing to make value judgements of me personally won’t do you or your arguments any favours. At this point, where you’ve been repeatedly demonstrated to be incredibly wrong, any further doubling down you do IS trolling.

1 Like
105

You’re trying the old creationist tactic of shifting the burden of proof. I’ve already explained why this is wrong. The burden of proof is on the claim that contradicts established knowledge.

Which is your claim. Burden of proof is on you, buddy.

See, if it was the other way around, then I could claim there is an invisible pink unicorn in my back yard, and unless you prove me wrong, then I must be right. It doesn’t work like that, not at all.

106

No, because you are stating facts based on what someone else has said to be a fact.

You haven’t come up with any facts other than what popular consensus is.

If the Universe didn’t need life to exist then why does life exist?

Creationist tactic? I am the farthest thing from a creationist which you are now using phishing tactics.

Science merely doesn’t say that something exists just because it exists like you have.

Science always proves the reason why reactions take place.

The only reason that the chemical reactions of the Big Bang took place was because life needed those reactions in order for life to exist and thrive as we know it today.

A Universe would not exist if there wasn’t a need for it too exist.

107

I am stating facts based on hundreds of years of research, and the independent results of hundreds of thousands of man hours of study on the subject. I’m not basing it on what they say, I’m basing it on what they’ve proven.

108

Have they even proven at what point life came to be in the Universe?

109

Have you?

110

Nice try but you are only using literary technique associated with the name of your corporation “Shock Treatment” You are trying project your words in an illusionary way and nothing more.

You said that your scientists have all of the answers and know for certain that life came after the Big Bang.

Yet when you are asked to prove it are you can do is flip the question around because you don’t have the answer and cannot think outside of the box but can only think how other want you to think to promote their own need for satisfaction.

You said that your scientists know for certain that life came after the Big Bang.

So why can’t you support the question with factual answers but can only throw a tantrum of words?

111

So where are all of the facts that humans came after the Big Bang?

If you can’t even provide a point at which life started in the Universe how can you prove that life didn’t exist prior to the Big Bang and necessitated the Big Bang for its energetic needs?

112

Okay, now you need to stop trying to divert. I’m not using any ‘techniques’, I’m stating facts, and you don’t like the facts, so you’re desperately trying to attribute any form of malice you can to my contradiction of you. When in reality, you’re just intellectually weak and have no real understanding of the universe, and no evidence for your claims. GTFO. My patience with you ends here.

113

Maybe go learn some science, because it actually answers your questions, and especially since you don’t actually know anything about science.

114

It’s you who lacks any understanding of the Universe. Other then what you have been told.

Think of the tree seed that was something else before it became a tree seed. The primordial tree seed had to have a need to be something else prior to the Big Bang. Otherwise it would not have gathered the elements together like it did after the Big Bang to become the tree. The Universe didn’t need the tree the tree needed the Universe.

The blue prints of all life therefore existed prior to the Big Bang. If you are saying that life was created by the Universe then based on your statements there would be no reason for the Universe to need to create life just like you have stated that the Universe doesn’t need life to exist.

The Universe exists for the sole purpose of life to achieve a greater understanding of itself that would not have been possible if Life simple did not create the Big Bang.

Contradiction?
GTFO? This is my post MF! Go troll someplace else.

115

Yes, GTFO. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Stick with what you’re good at… I can’t assume you’ll have much to do but I’m sure you’ll get by.

The universe doesn’t have a reason to exist. Nor does life. They are results. They are not the ends of some plan, but the results of natural processes. Learn some science before you expect to be taken seriously by someone who already has.

1 Like
116

You can’t provide an answer because you just want to live in the reality of “It is what it is.”

You don’t wan’t anyone to have the answer because you want the answer to come from only you.

Loser.

Result - a consequence, effect, or outcome of something.

So what consequence took place prior to the Big Bang that determined that our Universe needed the various elements that human life and other life is made up of needing to exist?

If there is no reason for life to exist then the chemical reactions that took place prior to the Big Bang would not have created the elements vital for life in the Universe that then became wide spread after the Big Bang.

117

I provided you a whole bunch of answers. You chose to ignore/dismiss them. I don’t expect you to do anything else with any other answers I provide, so why should I bother? You’re the one that thinks you already have the answers, so you should be satisfied.

118

You haven’t provided one answer other than spin. Where are all of the links to scientific papers from reputable sources? There aren’t any because you think that you are the source. Humans such as yourself rarely do anything difficult but merely talk and expect large returns. Doesn’t work like that.

The proof that life existed prior to the Big Bang and facilitated the Universe is rather easy to determine.

Humans grow and expand from microscopic sized cells. Much the same that the Universe grows and expanded from the Quantum and smaller region of physics.

Now if humans grow and expand from a microscopic source into 6’0’’ 250 pound human that consumes energy and the Universe has also expanded to become something much larger than it first was prior to the Big Bang, how would human DNA know to expand and grow into something 1,000 times its original size?

Based on what you have said that science has proven that life came to be after the Big Bang. How would Life’s DNA know to expand and grow larger if it came after the result of the Big Bang?

Life would know nothing of how the Big Bang functioned to then cause the processes contained within DNA to expand and grow outwards like the Big Bang did if life came after the Big Bang of the Universe.

Where do the set of instructions come from that direct Life’s DNA to direct processes in the human body and other life on Earth to expand and grow into something?

119

See? There you go dismissing it, and rather without merit as well. Your rejection of facts does not mean they are not facts, it just means you aren’t interested in a true understanding of reality, you’d rather cling to your fantasy that makes you feel good. So far, everything you’ve posted demonstrates both a lack of understanding, and a lack of interest in understanding. That’s on you.

120

You are a Narcissist and nothing more than that.

Explain what I just posted scientifically without using general catch phrases as a form of spin doctoring:

Humans grow and expand from microscopic sized cells. Much the same that the Universe grows and expanded from the Quantum and smaller region of physics.

Now if humans grow and expand from a microscopic source into 6’0’’ 250 pound human that consumes energy and the Universe has also expanded to become something much larger than it first was prior to the Big Bang, how would human DNA know to expand and grow into something 1,000 times its original size?

Based on what you have said that science has proven that life came to be after the Big Bang. How would Life’s DNA know to expand and grow larger if it came after the result of the Big Bang?

Life would know nothing of how the Big Bang functioned to then cause the processes contained within DNA to expand and grow outwards like the Big Bang did if life came after the Big Bang of the Universe.

Where do the set of instructions come from that direct Life’s DNA to direct processes in the human body and other life on Earth to expand and grow into something?

Explain why life expands and grows beyond the microscopic sized cells.

Explain why the Universe expands and grows beyond the Quantum sized particles.

The functions and process of how life expands and grows from cells is relative to the Big Bang. The basic set of genetic coding existed prior the Big Bang that directed energetic reactions to create the Big Bang for the purpose of life.

The is easy to prove.

Lighting strikes wherever, a natural process if you will.

But humans can direct the same type of electricity found in a lightning bolt across miles and miles of conductive wiring to a light bulb in a home that lets the human see at night time.

Is the Universe able to do the same thing?

The problem with you is that lack any purpose other than the purpose of being in the popular crowd, saying the same thing so as not be to locked in shackles or ridiculed. That’s you problem, not mine.