Discussion 3 options for life's origin. Which makes sense to you and why?

[MrCasella]

3 options for life's origin. Which makes sense to you and why?

After decades of study and debate it seems, in general terms, there are three primary possibilities offered for the origin of life and the material world. Either it popped into existence from nothing. It always existed. Or it was brought into existence from a real but non-material realm, for...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Forever Sleep]

Personally, I lean towards something or other always having existed. 'Stuff' floating about in space so- time too. If time stretches back infinitely, then it seems likely at some point, something would happen.

For my very non scientific brain, the phenomena of black holes seems to fit. So, enough stuff clumping together to create gravitational pull to attract more stuff until the pull is so strong and the matter so condensed that a black hole forms. (Not even sure if that's how they form but, it feels right.) Then, with such a huge amount of matter- enough to create the solar system, under so much pressure- it makes sense it could explode and spew everything back out- the big bang. I have nothing scientific to back it up, it's just something I can picture.

My brain struggles to come to grips with infinity or, something not having a beginning. But, that doesn't mean that they aren't possible. To go from nothing, no matter, no time to everything in this universe feels even weirder. To imagine there being a boundary around the universe also seems weird. I'm really not convinced by a God or being behind it either.

 

[SVEN]

Without getting into specific religious faiths, Intelligent Design and the irreducible complexity of such systems as the eye and respiratory mechanisms convince me of an "Originator(s)".

 

[yxmux]

abiogenesis

the idea that "life always existed" is absurd, and the notion of an intelligent designer outside physical reality is epistemologically unsound

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

+1 to abiogenesis. The religious strawman of "something from nothing" is not the scientific position. If you understand that inorganic compounds can combine and become organic ones, then it stands to reason that the only real factor that determines the emergence of life is time. I also reject the notion of "intellegent design", but this is not to say there is not an "intellegence" behind evolution. Not in the sense that there is intent beind it, but in the sense that the adaptions that arise from natural selection become increasingly more suited to surviving in said envionments.