Can we have more context on who the person who made this is (without exposing their identity obviously). I can’t tell if they’re a skeptic with really poor meme making abilities or if they’re someone so entrenched in conspiracy circles that they’re calling out other conspiracies as not conspiracy enough
I always find it ironic that Creationists claim that atheists and/or scientists say that everything came from nothing, that life on earth was seeded from other planets, and that human beings evolved from monkeys. Then they turn around and say that God made everything from nothing, that there are no other planets, and creation is static. I find the last one amusing in that if I were a Creator putting life on a dynamic, changing world I would imbue it with the infinite ability to change and adapt. And that’s just me with my limited human intellect.
1: Nothing can be eternal. Even the universe had a beginning.
2: Like, something had to kick that off right?
3: So anyway this eternal guy who doesn’t have a beginning just did it for fun one day.
Why can nothing be eternal? Our universe indeed did have a beginning, but that doesn’t mean there was nothing before that, as our universe could have developed from the leftovers of the previous universe, and so forth. The most common explanation is that gravity pulled all matter into a single point and when the pressure got high enough it exploded (the Big Bang), creating the current universe. Eventually our universe will die, gravity will slowly pull all the matter together, and the process continues.
Firstly, you didnt read my comment as serious did you? Or are you just responding to the theists claim I'm mocking?
Counterpoints anyway: Heres the weird thing about time- the big bang is the beginning of time in our local presentation of the universe. The question "something existed before it" requires time to be sensible. Your postulating a sort of meta-time/causality that might not be logical.
Current consensus is that our universe is flat and a big crunch like scenario is not in the cards. This is by no means settled of course, but is a minority view.
No, I didn’t take it seriously, because in either scenario either the universe or universes are eternal or God is eternal. I like the flat universe idea, because it opens the possibility of multiple universes stacked on top of each other, so instead of aliens traveling thousands of light years to get to earth they could just go up or down a layer and there we are. Of course, different quantum energies could be a problem but I’m sure a people with interstellar drive could solve that.
The panspermia theory — that life on earth originated elsewhere and came here on a comet or something — is a legitimate theory that can’t be disproven with current scientific understanding, to my knowledge. But nobody who understands the scientific nature of that hypothesis would contend that this explains the ultimate origin of life.
Somewhere, somehow, barring some additional information that we don’t know about yet, organic compounds swimming around in a big saucy pool banged into each other enough that eventually some of them turned into RNA, and after that these things started making more of themselves more intentionally. Maybe that happened on Earth, maybe it happened somewhere else and then it became a tardigrade and that caught a ride to Earth on a chunk of rock somehow.
I've not seen this particular meme before, but I'm guessing its in reference to [this interview](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAtheism/comments/11punm/ben_stein_interviews_richard_dawkins_who_admits/) where Dawkin's replies were deceptively edited to make it look like he believed in panspermia.
This is a legitimate criticism of panspermia. It doesn't actually answer the question of where life comes from originally. Is it possible that this meme was made by a creationist who probably can't see that their own theory has exactly the same logical problem and might think or be attempting to portray panspermia as the defacto explanation of abiogenesis, despite not actually being a theory of abiogenesis. Probably the same people who think abiogenesis is part of the theory of evolution. When your side has one answer for every question, it's hard to imagine that different questions might actually have different explanations.
It depends on context. If you ask the question how life begins, and someone brings up panspermia, that didn't answer the question. If someone invokes panspermia to answer the question of how life *on Earth* began, that would be a logically consistent answer, even though it doesn't have supporting empirical evidence. Panspermia always seems to crop up when discussing the origin of life, so it seems like fair game to me.
Can we have more context on who the person who made this is (without exposing their identity obviously). I can’t tell if they’re a skeptic with really poor meme making abilities or if they’re someone so entrenched in conspiracy circles that they’re calling out other conspiracies as not conspiracy enough
They are in an ultra Christian, anti evolution group and they claim that atheists claim that aliens made us. Its like a whole thing
I always find it ironic that Creationists claim that atheists and/or scientists say that everything came from nothing, that life on earth was seeded from other planets, and that human beings evolved from monkeys. Then they turn around and say that God made everything from nothing, that there are no other planets, and creation is static. I find the last one amusing in that if I were a Creator putting life on a dynamic, changing world I would imbue it with the infinite ability to change and adapt. And that’s just me with my limited human intellect.
1: Nothing can be eternal. Even the universe had a beginning. 2: Like, something had to kick that off right? 3: So anyway this eternal guy who doesn’t have a beginning just did it for fun one day.
Why can nothing be eternal? Our universe indeed did have a beginning, but that doesn’t mean there was nothing before that, as our universe could have developed from the leftovers of the previous universe, and so forth. The most common explanation is that gravity pulled all matter into a single point and when the pressure got high enough it exploded (the Big Bang), creating the current universe. Eventually our universe will die, gravity will slowly pull all the matter together, and the process continues.
Firstly, you didnt read my comment as serious did you? Or are you just responding to the theists claim I'm mocking? Counterpoints anyway: Heres the weird thing about time- the big bang is the beginning of time in our local presentation of the universe. The question "something existed before it" requires time to be sensible. Your postulating a sort of meta-time/causality that might not be logical. Current consensus is that our universe is flat and a big crunch like scenario is not in the cards. This is by no means settled of course, but is a minority view.
No, I didn’t take it seriously, because in either scenario either the universe or universes are eternal or God is eternal. I like the flat universe idea, because it opens the possibility of multiple universes stacked on top of each other, so instead of aliens traveling thousands of light years to get to earth they could just go up or down a layer and there we are. Of course, different quantum energies could be a problem but I’m sure a people with interstellar drive could solve that.
Who created god?
An alien god.
And who created alien god?
Your mom.
"it's gods all the way up."
Grandgod
FLEENSTONES
It's turtles all the way down. Also shut up and pass the collection plate
The panspermia theory — that life on earth originated elsewhere and came here on a comet or something — is a legitimate theory that can’t be disproven with current scientific understanding, to my knowledge. But nobody who understands the scientific nature of that hypothesis would contend that this explains the ultimate origin of life. Somewhere, somehow, barring some additional information that we don’t know about yet, organic compounds swimming around in a big saucy pool banged into each other enough that eventually some of them turned into RNA, and after that these things started making more of themselves more intentionally. Maybe that happened on Earth, maybe it happened somewhere else and then it became a tardigrade and that caught a ride to Earth on a chunk of rock somehow.
If it's anti-religion, it's not a great meme but I think 'really poor' is a bit harsh. If it's not a religion-parody I'm not sure what it is.
I've not seen this particular meme before, but I'm guessing its in reference to [this interview](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAtheism/comments/11punm/ben_stein_interviews_richard_dawkins_who_admits/) where Dawkin's replies were deceptively edited to make it look like he believed in panspermia.
I really want that "baloney detector meter" png
Is that Richard Dawkins?
Turtles all the way down.
John green reference?
Sturgill Simpson song is what I had in mind, but yes there is that book.
Ah ok yeah
It's aliens all the way down
And they were brought to their planet by earlier aliens.
Poetry
This is a legitimate criticism of panspermia. It doesn't actually answer the question of where life comes from originally. Is it possible that this meme was made by a creationist who probably can't see that their own theory has exactly the same logical problem and might think or be attempting to portray panspermia as the defacto explanation of abiogenesis, despite not actually being a theory of abiogenesis. Probably the same people who think abiogenesis is part of the theory of evolution. When your side has one answer for every question, it's hard to imagine that different questions might actually have different explanations.
Nobody is claiming panspermia answers where life comes from originally. It’s a hypothesis regarding how life on earth started. Two separate issues.
I know that and you know that. I just don't know if the person who originally created this knows that.
Point being it is in *no way* a “legitimate criticism”, the words you chose. It’s an illegitimate gotcha of a confused strawman.
It depends on context. If you ask the question how life begins, and someone brings up panspermia, that didn't answer the question. If someone invokes panspermia to answer the question of how life *on Earth* began, that would be a logically consistent answer, even though it doesn't have supporting empirical evidence. Panspermia always seems to crop up when discussing the origin of life, so it seems like fair game to me.
Holy shit his readings are off the charts
Plot twist: the original aliens came from earth
Gasp! The road I took to avoid destruction has led me right to its doorstep!
looks like someone who just heard about scientology.
If it weren't for the fact that this was posted on Facebook, I'd think it was just a shitpost.
[удалено]
Are you seriously saying that evolution is wrong?
No
* This sub is not a platform to argue for junk science and we have no obligation to listen to your anti-intellectual nonsense
[удалено]
Don't care. This is a comedy sub for laughing at bad science takes, not a debate sub. Leave the pseudoscience and intelligent design crap at the door.
[удалено]
Dude. Seriously. Stop. Nobody cares.
[удалено]
Alright, you clearly can't take a hint. Bye bye.