Habemas Papem!

[Kidlicious]

No. They are the ones who have turned their back on Him. Old Testament bull**** isn't what Jesus is about. READ YOUR ****ING BIBLE YOU STUPUID ****

You do know that Jesus quotes the OT a few times in the Bible, right?

[Kidlicious]

Since you're a creationist and seem to think you have a close personal relationship with the almighty, why not ask him next time why a majority of the species on the planet are predatory (the nice ones), parisitic (fleas, ticks, phages, etc.), or vermin/scavengers (roaches, beetles, crabs, etc.) Not a very nice god if that's what he gave Adam and Eve for their little "garden"

You mean you don't know the answer? Hint: why are humans predators?

[Kidlicious]

Pretty much all you need is gravity > 0.5 earth gravity, < ~1.7-2.0 earth gravity, liquid water on a regular basis in at least temperate zones (though planet-wide mean temperature could be hotter or colder), relative tectonic stability, some magnetic field depending on proximity to star and mass, and ideally, a significant moon to create tidal activity, but that's really more of a speedup factor for primitive life development.

First of all, the issue is complex intelligent life. So yes you need the conditions for the same type of evolution that occured on earth. You need another earth.

[MichaeltheGreat]

We're not. We're nearly omnivores. We have a distinct gut and GI tract from either predators or herbivores, and the ability to produce digestive and metabolic enzymes to deal with a much wider variety of food sources.

[MichaeltheGreat]

First of all, the issue is complex intelligent life. So yes you need the conditions for the same type of evolution that occured on earth. You need another earth.

No, you don't. The contraints aren't that narrow. All you need to do is have conditions within a range for the same types of biochemical reaction and relatively the same physiological limits (e.g. upper range of gravity - the lower range is for atmospheric retention, not a physiological constraint.) Gravity beyond 2.0 imposes too many physiological and mobility limits on an organism. The whole point of intelligence from an evolutionary point of view is that it is a more efficient adaptation. Creatures that are massive and slow in a uniformly challenging environment don't need the energy drain that comes with a big brain, they need physical strength and robust vascular systems to deal with the muskuloskeletal structure that would be required in a higher G environment.

[Kidlicious]

We're not. We're nearly omnivores. We have a distinct gut and GI tract from either predators or herbivores, and the ability to produce digestive and metabolic enzymes to deal with a much wider variety of food sources.

Ok Ben Kenobi.

[Kidlicious]

No, you don't. The contraints aren't that narrow. All you need to do is have conditions within a range for the same types of biochemical reaction and relatively the same physiological limits (e.g. upper range of gravity - the lower range is for atmospheric retention, not a physiological constraint.) Gravity beyond 2.0 imposes too many physiological and mobility limits on an organism. The whole point of intelligence from an evolutionary point of view is that it is a more efficient adaptation. Creatures that are massive and slow in a uniformly challenging environment don't need the energy drain that comes with a big brain, they need physical strength and robust vascular systems to deal with the muskuloskeletal structure that would be required in a higher G environment.

No. No. You don't understand how unlikely it is for intelligent life to evolve. It's not like it's a given under similar circumstance. It's not like that at all. We evolved because everything happened just as it did.

[MichaeltheGreat]

It's not my fault you're ignorant of comparative biology. We need to eat stuff predators can't digest effectively, or at all. Hence, we are not predators even if we do enjoy the occasional BBQ.

[Kidlicious]

It's not my fault you're ignorant of comparative biology. We need to eat stuff predators can't digest effectively, or at all. Hence, we are not predators even if we do enjoy the occasional BBQ.

It's got nothing to do with eating BBQ. Your question (if that's what you want to call), has to do with why there are predators (why is there killing).

[MichaeltheGreat]

No. No. You don't understand how unlikely it is for intelligent life to evolve. It's not like it's a given under similar circumstance. It's not like that at all. We evolved because everything happened just as it did.

You're referring to the anthropic principle in another form, which is nothing but pseudoscience.

[MichaeltheGreat]

It's got nothing to do with eating BBQ. Your question (if that's what you want to call), has to do with why there are predators (why is there killing).

I was responding to your "hint" that why are we predators, when in fact we're not. I know the bull**** creationist answer about the fall, but that's laughable, as it ignores the massive differences in digestive anatomy and biochemistry between herbivores and predators. It's a cute fairy tale for primitive people without the means (or nowadays, the real interest) to discover the real answer.

[Kidlicious]

You're referring to the anthropic principle in another form, which is nothing but pseudoscience.

Why on earth would you say that? All of the evidence points to this conclusion. You have no evidence whatsoever for intelligent life on other planets. There has never even been found, a planet that could even possibly contain complex life.

For 3.5 billion years life existed on this planet that did not even evolve into complex species. Something happened on earth that is unique to earth. You're the psuedoscientist.

[Kidlicious]

I was responding to your "hint" that why are we predators, when in fact we're not. I know the bull**** creationist answer about the fall, but that's laughable, as it ignores the massive differences in digestive anatomy and biochemistry between herbivores and predators. It's a cute fairy tale for primitive people without the means (or nowadays, the real interest) to discover the real answer.

You're question was posed, "ask your God." It was a stupid question.

[Kidlicious]

Erm, no. Evolution is an explanation of a long-term process that is driven by random mutations as well as many other factors. Evolution is not something that happens, it's an explanation for things that happen. It's species level, not individual level - so you can't even say it really has (directly) random factors. Evolution is the description for how some traits are chosen over other traits leading to species differentiation and natural selection. Requiring it to explain or even consider random mutations is like asking the theory of how cars work to explain proton-electron interactions.

Exactly. Evolution is a theory that explains how intelligent life evolved on this planet. The fact is that even if there are planets with life on them there may never be any evolution at all. There could be other planets with singlecell organisms and no complex life forms at all, and there will never be any complex life forms on that planet. Or there could be life forms that have evolved but there has not been any evolution into intelligent life, nor will there ever be.

[dannubis]

You do know that Jesus quotes the OT a few times in the Bible, right?

You do know that he also basically said to forget it right ?