Posted by njili on November 25, 1998 at 09:13:54:
In Reply to: Yes, let's try another tack. posted by Pohl on November 24, 1998 at 23:03:20:
: You seem to be saying that because I am here and because I got here by spontaneous generation; therefore there is a 100 percent chance that life came from spontaneous generation. Does this encapsulate what you are saying?
: In addition, do you believe that the universe had a beginning like Einstein or that it evolves like a wave of ups and downs like Richard Dawkins? Just curious. Talk to you later Bye.
No, I'm not saying we got here by spontaneous generation. I was arguing with your odds and not the methodology of life coming into existence. I don't know how we got here but I think it was probably a mixture of the elements in the primordial sea and perhaps a bit of electricity (whether static or lightning) but almost certainly not 'spontaneous' (of the many dictionary definitions of 'spontaneous' the one which I find most elegant is "developing without apparent external influence, force, cause or treatment" (Merriam Webster (5))). But if you're here, then the odds are 100 percent for conditions conducive to life developing on the planet, at some time in the past.
As regards your second question, I'm most comfortable thinking that we are in a collapsing universe wherein the 'big bang' occurs, the universe expands and billions of years later, due to gravity, it contracts back into the form it held at the instant the big bang occured. Since I dont believe there is such a thing as time under those conditions, I've decided not to wonder what conditions were like before that (there is no such thing as 'before'. And, with no time, there's also no after.
Although there's no 'before the big bang' or 'after the collapse', I sometimes wonder if this whole thing can/has/will/must happen more than once but I try to limit thinking on that subject to those times when I'm in the dentist's chair. It's better than nitrous oxide.