Are Aliens Living On Planets Inside Black Holes?

Life can and probably does exist all over the known universe. Even if it's not life as we know it. Maybe it's silicon based life forms, or an ocean of neurons that has become self aware...or spaced based life that live in the vacum.

My head hurts

Yea but even if this was true, since they exist past the event horizon and we can never interact with them by any means they by all practicality don't exist.

Its the same as saying Mickey Mouse is real and alive in some alternative universe.

www.pixelvortex.org - blog discussing the philosophy of reality

Despite my headache, I have an idea. The interstellar medium primarily consists of hydrogen and a very small amount of helium. If space is constantly expanding, it must at some point tear, much like if I were to stretch a sheet of cling film. However the arrow of time theory claims that our universe is decaying. Perhaps black holes are a way of regenerating? If energy can be absorbed, then possibly planets and stars are consumed and absorbed. If a black hole is a form plasma, in a bigger picture we are organisms, including our planets, stars ect? Everything that consumes must have a bi-product or waste. If this is the case with black holes, then their waste could be space itself.
Below is an interesting clip:

Superfluid Helium.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI

Of course aliens can live inside the event horizon. Look at the Heechee in the Fredrick Pohl novels. They have been hiding there for millennia. When they want to come out they just use their "can openers" to cut through spacetime and slip out the side of the hole. Everyone knows this is science fact...er fiction? I always get those two confused.

Were living in on of those you just don't know it!

Just because there could potentially be an area beyond an event horizon that something could survive doesn't mean anything would ever be there. Keep in mind that in order to get there, you would have to approach the black hole where the tidal forces would rip everything apart.

Oops, just read the last paragraph where they mentioned tidal forces. Either way, it's way too unlikely for a planet to survive that, let alone life.

Or maybe the reason that alien life has not yet been found is that it does not and cannot exist. The craze about extraterrestrial life is based upon the belief that because life evolved from non-life here on Earth, and there are so many other planets in the universe, it must have evolved in other places as well. Hmm, so how do we know that life evolved here in the first place? The theory of evolution was not developed because some scientist was observing the natural world and incidentally discovered evidence that pointed irrefutably to molecules to man evolution.

Actually, Charles Darwin had already read the some of the writings of Charles Lyell on his idea of uniformitarianism and had accepted that everything in the universe has arisen to what it is by slow and random processes. As a result of this, he looked at everything through these "glasses." So, when he observed the changes in average beak size and shape in the finches of the Galapagos Islands as a result of natural selection, he assumed that he had witnessed a tiny part of the evolution that had created every living thing. How exactly the different sizes and shapes of beaks came about in the first place, he had no scientific explanation for. It's one thing to explain how and why the beaks of finches went from a variety of sizes and shapes to mainly, if not totally, long and thin beaks; but it is quite another to explain where that variety of beaks came from in the first place.

Then, someone had the brilliant idea that new changes in structure of organisms are the result of mutations. DNA was discovered, and people found out that mutations were mistakes that were made while the DNA was being copied. This casts doubt on the idea that new genetic information could arise as a result of mutations. Imagine a copy machine is printing the pages of a long book. Then, a mutation occurs, and the machine makes a mistake. If the only data that the machine has access to is the book it is printing, there is no way that it can print a page of coherent information (a redundant redundancy) that did not come from the book it is printing. In other words, no new information can arise from mistakes in copying information.

@tertertert,
I thought the same but what if a planet formed in the orbit and then ensued life! That's assuming that planet could form inside that orbital has planets have formed around the sun.

so techinally planets can survive black holes only to be sucked into an alternate universe? have i been watching too much "Star Trek" lately?

@con17
stop wasting your intellect defending a fairy tale. Think outside of your box.

Generally speaking, many things can be imagined but may not exist. The scientist that proposed this is just doing his job which is to determine what may be possible. He is studying the properties of this zone of a black hole and noting some interesting aspects.

Someday far in the future, we may be able to insert a probe into this zone and study the black hole from the inside.

@michael taylor: nice post. exactly. but its still an interesting article.

Come on, advanced aliens would consider anything trying to hide that way prehistoric. Why hide when you can cloak your world and hide it from any uninvited new civilization. After all Cuba and the old soviet Empire jammed our radio transmissions for over 50 years. Advanced alien life forms are jamming our microwave and radio frequency outside our solar system. The only ones that know that we are here are the ones hiding us from the rest of the universe, kind of like you protecting your pet from a pact of hungry wolves by removing all their senses and keeping them inside a windowless house. They only let us see what they want us to see...

Ron Bennett

Considering the power of our electromagnetic communications in comparison with our local star's radio output... imagine what kind of signal even the most sensitive receiver might catch from us from even the closest star...

Could you see a transitory ember in front of a spotlight from 1000 miles with a good pair of binoculars?

Although I do like the idea. I agree with some post above about the danger trying to hide there.

If they have to go to that much trouble to hide in a black hole then another advance race is what they are hiding from and they will eventually find them. If someone on a planet like earths with no alien advance degrees can think of that idea then other alien civilizations over 5 billion years older than our would have known billions of years ago what black-hole rock to look under to find their prey.

You think our solar system has extreme impacts that can kill off all live forms on earth every 250 million years with just a measly small 6 mile diameter asteroid or comet, then it must be 1,000,000,000 time more harder to protect themselves from the collisions where they are trying to hide.

Ron Bennett

@Metamorphosis Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. Universal energy exchange. You are absolutely correct.

@con17 The laws that govern the universe are like the roots of a tree. Roots do not ask why or if water exists below them, they continue to grow until they reach it. So is the laws of the universe. The universe does not design life with a premeditated strategy. Life is the product of the universe's governing laws, which spreads its roots beyond our narrow perception.

@rlb2 You have it backwards. You only see what you understand.

@rlb2 Life does not have to always be human, it does not have to think like a human, and it does not have to protect itself from destruction like a human. That is the process that brought you here today.

I agree with CON17 on the point that eviloution is a myth, a fabricated story by elites. However CON17 what makes you think that God in his infinite wisdow would stop (or start) creation with humans. God created the universe in this dimension, therefore he created all life within it as well.

Con 17 never mentioned God, gods, or anything divine or theological - he merely pointed out the shortcomings in the development of the belief in evolution. The only ones mentioning God are those who wished to dissent with him and needed a staw man arguement to attack.

The reason for postulating a planet in such an orbit is baseless hope.

We know that intellegent life tends to be noisy - and the more intellegent it is, the more noise it tends to put into the cosmos. We have been listening to space for some time and not heard anything. This means:

A - We might be unique intellegence in the universe.
B - We might be first in the universe (ahead of all other intellegences).
C - We might be the last intellegence in the universe (every other gone so long as to leave no residual noise).
D - We are roughly on par with other intellegences, only they are so far away we have not yet heard each other yet.

None of those is consistant with super-advanced species ready to willi-nilli help us leapfrog the slow painful process of technological development and lead us into a futuristic utopia.

Therefore, since the question is "How could a more advanced civilization be out there without us hearing it?" This far fetched attempt at an answer is driven only by the hope that it could be true.

Sadly, however, humanity in the vastness of space is, for the lives of all living and all who will be known by those living, alone.

Usually the comments section offers some good discussion, but I'm afraid this time it has degraded a bit. @con17 it seems you have posited that evolution is not true. This is all well and good but what you have failed to do is offer any evidence to support your position.

I may have detected a bit of the old "no new information" fallacy. But this is simply false. We have observed evolution in real time through gene mutation and duplication.

I believe we have evolved through evolution because there is LOADS of evidence to support that position. If someone came along with enough evidence to overturn all the evidence for evolution, then I would believe that theory. At this point in time, given what we know about how life has arrived to this point, no other theory even comes close to explaining what evolution can explain. Most of the people who don't accept evolution either are ignorant of the facts, or support an ideology where no amount of evidence will change their mind.

@oakspar77777
another reason why we might not have any evidence of life in the universe based on their "noise" even though we constantly listen is because we know that signals eventualy lose their structure and disperse through spacetime. in other words they could be so far away that by the time that noise reaches us its just static and doesnt retain any order or pattern. We like to think that our tv, radio etc signals will travel the universe and be heard in distant galaxys but that isnt the case.

@Far Out Man

Fairy Tale? As in Hansel and Gretel? Umm, which fairy tale are you talking about?

If you are refering to the existence of God, I have plenty of precedence: Sir Isaac Newton, William Blackstone, and James Clerk Maxwell, and Max Planck all believed in the existence of God.

Are you above the this atrocity known as "thinking inside the box"? I would dare to assert that no finite human being has ever fully thought outside of his "box."

@Solomon Sinclair

Interesting. But do you have any evidence to back up your assertion?

@Aldrons Last Hope

FYI: I come from a Christian perspective in that I believe that when God created the universe, He created it without death(Romans 5:12). When the first humans disobeyed His command, He cursed the entire universe (all creation groans and travails in pain: Romans 8:22).

If that is not true, there is no reason that I know of that God did not create other intelligent life. If it is true, doesn't it seem unfair that God would allow other intelligent creatures (who must be part of creation) to suffer for the sins of an unrelated human? I don't think it makes sense that there be illigent life other than human beings.

@con17
your assertion that we are alone in the universe simply cause of a verse in the the bible is kinda irrelavent. remember the bible was wrote by man so it is strictly of the human perspective of existince/creation.while im not going to argue over the existince of god its still strange to assume that the humans i.e the bible writers would have a full unederstanding of the universe, so how could they refer to anything but humans in the known i.e explored world.also take into consideration that the bible is imo full of allagory and metaphor and is but one of humans veiws on the universe/creator scheme.
so basically that verse is humans refering to their perspective not only on religion but of the universe and its people i.e humans and the earth.
if you take it as a factual, set in stone word of law then ya i guess you have a point. But if you see a representation of one perspective like i do then it becomes irrelavent as far as life in the universe goes.

@Hickey10

Well, you provide no more evidence for your view in your comment than I do in mine. You mention the often cited "loads of evidence" for evolution, yet you provide none of it. While it is true that many who don't hold to the theory of evolution are ignorant of scientific evidence for or against it, the same is true for your side. Many people who hold to the theory of evolution know little evidence to support their belief as well (and often that little bit they remember are long-refuted "evidences" like Hegel's embryos).

Scientists perform observations and draw conclusions based on both what they observe and their presuppositions. Two scientists can look at a piece of data and draw two completely different conclusions based on that data. Most people these days in industrialized nations grow up being taught that the theory of evolution is a proven fact. As a result, they view the world they encounter through these "glasses."

Case in point: when someone proclaims various "vestigial" organs (many of which are now known to have many uses) and other perceived flaws in humans and animals as evidence for macro evolution, I look at those same things and see the result of sin and God's resultant curse on a previously perfect creation. Someone points to the many layers of rock in the Grand Canyon and the fact that sedimentary rock builds up very slowly under normal conditions, and the relatively tiny Colorado River in the bottom of the canyon and the slow rate at which it wears away at the rock. I think of the eruption of Mount Saint Helens in Washington State in 1980 and the sudden appearance of miniature "Grand Canyons" with many layers that would normally require "millions and millions" of years to create, and the little creeks running through the bottoms of them that are mere shadows of the mud slides that actually carved them.

I will admit, though, that I have started with the belief that God exists and the earth isn't really billions of years old and then looked at nature and humanity's own actions and have decided that they make sense within that framework, and not the other way around. I would also propose that that is the standard way it works, and that most people, evolutionist or not, operate in the same way.

@spacethefinalbuffet

In my response to Aldrons Last Hope's comment, I was coming from the perspective that the Bible is God's infallible, inerrant Word. That is, what the Bible says, God says. While the Bible was written down by men, what they wrote was inspired by God (God-breathed: God put words or ideas into the minds of men, and they wrote it down). If this is the case, then what the Bible says on any subject is relevant to that subject. If it isn't, then, like I said above, I know of no reason that God didn't create intelligent life other than humanity.

@con17
Wow,your point of view is so small and absurd that there really is no point in responding to your comment. But, for the sake of the integrity of this discussion, I will. You ask Hickey10 for evidence to support his response?! How about you open your eyes a fraction of a millimeter and go to any bona fide encyclopedia, website, book, or resource and look up EVOLUTION. Are you truly so naive and incompetent that you do not already know of any evidence that supports evolution? Also you say, "Case in point: when someone proclaims various "vestigial" organs (many of which are now known to have many uses) and other perceived flaws in humans and animals as evidence for macro evolution, I look at those same things and see the result of sin and God's resultant curse on a previously perfect creation." People who look at vestigial organs and think they are the "result of sin and God's resultant curse on a previously perfect creation" are uneducated day dreamers who have nothing better to do than dream up some absurd, impossible fairy tale to explain these things. They are not scientists. NO SCIENTIST WILL LOOK AT A VESTIGIAL ORGAN AND CLAIM IT WAS MADE BY A GOD. Scientists support all their conclusions with EVIDENCE and PROOF. Sadly there is NO evidence to support the existence of a magic man in the sky,(God). However, there are entire books of evidence to support the Theory of Evolution! It seems like you would believe anything, no matter how little evidence there is to support your belief. Religion is so absurd that I cannot fathom why any educated person of the modern world can still believe in these fairy tales. Religion should have died as soon as we discovered that Earth was not the center of the universe. Go ahead. Open your eyes and stop believing in a fairy tale.

The reason dear sir that there are so many books on evaluation is that it is such a hard theory to defend and patch up every failure it has to explain life, Christianity only has one book and that was enough, but beside that point we are far off topic of the actual discussion and i don't want to argue with stubborn mules... both of you...(dj/con) con don't speak so rashly, eyes see what they want to and ears the same when they are told to, so speak, don't yell.

i understand these view points but the better question is not are aliens sitting there waiting for us, but rather is it possible to get there

Who knew that black hole physics was powerful enough to warp Popular Science into Unpopular Religion...

@ everyone who is in that discussion started by con17
If there is evidence for evolution, please post it and not just reassure us that it exists. I think I'll now show some of the evidence against macroevolution. For one thing, evolution is now based on the assumption that mutations can add information to the genetic code. I've never known this to be true. A mutation is when the DNA of a creature is damaged and incorrectly repaired, so that some of the DNA is rendered unusable. Even if the DNA was usable, then it is still incredibly unlikely that the mutation would be helpful, or passed on. Also, many biological structures are so interconnected that they would not be able to function if even one part were missing, let alone if only one part caused by an extremely unlikely mutation was present. If you want an example of this, look up the bombardier beetle, or perhaps the human eye. The last reason I shall quote here is that there are so few transitory species. You would expect to find such large amounts of transitory species that you wouldn't be able to separate them from the "normal" organisms. And if you happen to think of the hypotheses that there were enormous disasters followed by huge amounts of mutations, how would those organisms reproduce? Their DNA would be twisted so far beyond the original that they would be incompatible.

By the way, how did this discussion get started on a rather interesting article about the possibility of planets existing in black holes?

@DJ

Umm, I'm still waiting... Did you miss what I was hinting at in my response to Hickey10? The infamous "LOADS" of evidence for evolution has made another appearance. I will ask you (and anyone else interested) directly now: Please tell me some of this "LOADS" of evidence for evolution. Or, do you not know any of it yourself and are merely trusting that it exists? If you do know some, please tell me it so that we can have an intellectual discussion about it rather than sitting around and calling each other names.

For the sake of the integrity of this discussion, I must disagree with your unprovable assertion that no scientist will look at a vestigial organ and say it was made by a god. The previously mentioned James Clerk Maxwell (btw, he discovered the law of electromagnetism) was a very devout Christian; he definitely would say that organs, vestigial or otherwise, were created by God. There are also many contemporary scientists that I know of who would say such a thing as well, but I will not give their names until you give me some evidence for evolution.

I am hoping, however, that you did not mean that statement literally. I would guess that you meant that no scientist could come to the conclusion, based on empirical evidence alone, that God created something. (There is also the possibility that you believe in the infallibility of scientists: that whatever a scientist says, he supports with conclusive evidence, but I hope we don't have to go there) For much of the same reason that you can't scientifically prove that God exists, you can't scientifically prove that the theory of evolution accurately describes the origin of species. Now, settle down, hear me out.

There are two different uses of the word "science" that are relevant to this discussion: theoretical and empirical science. Theoretical science is looking at data and trying to create a plausible explanation for it. Empirical science involves using the scientific method for determining how the natural world works. When most people use the word "science," they are referring to empirical science. Now, in order to prove something (to show that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, it is true), empirical science needs to be used. The theory of evolution is an example of theoretical science. It is a guess at what happened in the past to attempt to explain how living things came to be the way they are today. However, since it is a guess at what happened in the past, the scientific method cannot be applied to it. The theory of evolution is a hypothesis, a conjecture that is unprovable because it is not repeatable.

Now, if you have some evidence that you think refutes what I just said, please tell me what it is, don't just tell me that it exists.

@calebscape808

Sorry, was I yelling?

calebscape808 good point, the pope already accepted the fact that there may be aliens out there why can't we.

michael taylor if the aliens were that smart enough to move there then it may be easy for them to communicate with other life forms because as has been recently proposed by Susskind and accepted by Stephen Hawking -- information can escape a black hole See:

Black hole information paradox

"Susskind quashes Hawking in quarrel over quantum quandary"

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox

rlb2 good stuff.

Why is it that we have to be preached too all the time about god when we are talking about science. I think I will get a bunch of evolutionist together and go crash all the religious rights blogs. This is science not religious fervor, save that for the sermons on whatever day you practice your religion, there are plenty of people there to talk about your religious beliefs.

@Con17
I love Christian logic... All in the heart and none in the head. " the Bible is God's infallible, inerrant Word "

-Pi doesn't equal three
-The earth is not a circle, it is a three dimensional obloidal sphere. Nor does it have four corners.
-The sun should be created before the plants as plants need sunlight to photosynthesise.
-Bats aren't birds.
-Hares don't chew cud.
-The sky is not a solid structure.
-The sun does not move around the earth.
-Insects do not have four legs.
-People do not live to be 600 years old.
-The Israelite population went from 75 to several million in a few hundred years.
-A brass serpent and a pole will not cure a snakebite
-Giants do not exist.
-Unicorns do not exist.
-The earth is not suspended in space by pillars.
-Prayer will not cure you of illness. How many Christians do you know that use hospitals and medicine when they are ill..?
-The moon does not produce it's own light.
-According to scripture, congenitally disabled children are made by god that way, not due to unfortunate genetic mutation.
-Bushes can't talk.
-Noah's ark is an impossibility let alone the logistics of caring and feeding (and lets not forget all the poo).
-It is impossible to cover the entire earth with the water contained within it, even including the polar ice caps.
-Dead seeds do not germinate.
-The deaf and mute are not possessed by the devil.

And there's my personal fav...
PR 30:5 Every word of God proves true.
1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, JE 4:10, JE 20:7, EZ 14:9 God deceives some of the prophets.
JE 8:8 The scribes (copyists, editors, teachers) falsify the word.
2TH 2:11-12 God deceives the wicked (to be able to condemn them).
(Note: Not every word of God can prove true if God deceives anyone at all; teaching from the Bible cannot be trusted if the scribes falsify the word. In other words, the first reference is mutually exclusive with the other three. Thus, the Bible cannot be the perfect work of a perfect, all-powerful and loving God since one or more of the above references is obviously untrue. Note also: Some versions use the word "persuade" rather than "deceives." The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.)

So much for infallible and inerrant...

So in conclusion, please read MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm... try it... and let me know how it goes!!

According to every religion, all life is sacred but the mentioning of alien life suggests to me that life is all about technology and there is nothing worth saving but everything must be studied and researched. I think alien life is here on earth already but we need to treat them with respect and not try to study them and they will allow us to understand them. "Love makes the world go 'round" is a phrase from a greeting card. So I believe it's not science that keeps this world spinning and our feet planted to the ground but love.

@shutterpod: "Who knew that black hole physics was powerful enough to warp Popular Science into Unpopular Religion..."

Well played good sir.

Well... so many requests for evidence of evolution and non-harmful genetic mutations. May I ask of the Creationists/ID supporters(the difference between the two being Creationists try to teach the story of [Judeo-Christian] creation, and ID supporters try to teach "controversy" of evolution), do any of you have any of the following traits: blue eyes, hanging ear lobes, a "double joint"?

Those are all very rudimentary, every day mutations. In terms of evolution, it is a multitude of small mutations such as these which build up over time to cause what we call speciation, or a build up of evolutionary mutations in a population which changes it enough to require a new taxonomic distinction.

More every day evidence you say? Do you have a pet perhaps? A nice cat or dog? Ornamental cats, and nearly all dog breeds are products of evolution, in this case man-made evolution. That's right creationists, you deity did not create your Jack Russell Terrier. From now on, look at your pets in disdain, knowing that they are indeed more evidence for evolution.

How about blood types? Are you IDers/Creationists familiar with the variety of blood types in the ABO/RH system groupings? There are 12 possible blood types, AO+, AO-, AA+, AA-, BB+, BB-, BO+, BO-, AB+, AB-, OO+, OO-. Thanks to modern medical science, we understand exactly how a child inherits it's blood types from the combination of it's parents genetic materials, and we also understand that it was impossible for two single individuals (Adam and Eve) to produce an entire population of humans numbering over 6 billion with just their 2 blood types WITHOUT non-harmful genetic mutations(an example of evolution, even if the Judeo-Christian story of Creation were to be accepted as true!)

A (Creationist/ID) commenter made note of "never seeing a genetic mutation add genetic material". It happens, it's real. Example: Klinefelter's Syndrome, or "XXY syndrome". This is a genetic mutation in which an individual inherits EXTRA genetic information when they are conceived, usually an extra X chromosome.

Now, this brings me to something I want to address: In my experiences, those that I've met in my lifetime who believe in ID/Creationism have always, always, ALWAYS had this skewed, improper view of mutations for which I believe science fiction media is to blame. The most absurd among these is that the mutations which lead to evolution happen randomly during an organisms lifetime. This is incorrect, as those mutations usually result in cancer or other illnesses. The mutations that add to the evolutionary process are those which occur prior to birth, and in most cases at conception, or very shortly thereafter. Second among the incorrect views I speak of is that mutations are big and noticeable. This is again incorrect, natural mutations are minuscule, and for the most part imperceivable without careful scrutinizing of a specimen and it's surrounding population.

Now if you don't mind, I'd like to make a point concerning sexual reproduction and the story of creation. As the story goes, God created EVERYTHING by the sixth day(man, animal, microbe, land, air, sea, space, universe), and upon the seventh day he rested(reasons why I can't get delicious Chic-Fil-A chicken on Sundays -_-). So, by the sixth day EVERYTHING was created, and sometime AFTER that Adam and Eve and all of human kind were cursed for eating a Red Delicious variety apple. I'd like to make note yet again, EVERYTHING has already been created by an omnipotent deity, including certain organisms that can't survive outside of a particular, intimate environment. Yes, I speak of STDs, or the politically correct "STIs". We can actually go even further, and include ever single sickness and cold which is specific to mankind(excluding the Biblical plagues for good measure). We know that a good many of these diseases require a human host to survive and spread, and without it they die. We must logically conclude then that by the world of the holy book Adam and Eve were sickly, diseased, and plague ridden individuals as all of the diseases which require human hosts were already in existence, and the only two humans were Adam and Eve(as I said before though we may exclude those diseases and sicknesses specifically mentioned by biblical accounts). Some beneficial creator they had.

Now, for omnipotence. There's a specific catch 22 with limitless power and the ability to do ANYTHING, which is technically an omnipotent being should have the power to create something so massive that it could not lift it. If the being could indeed create something so massive, but was not subsequently able to lift it, then omnipotence is impossible.

I think that is for now all that I care to address. If there is anyone who is genuinely interested in learning about evolution and expanding their mind to the true beauty of the universe, please don't be afraid to speak up. For those individuals who prefer to believe in something that cannot be witnessed, please remove your views to a forum where they are welcome. This is first and foremost a scientific venue, and we scientific heathens would appreciate not hearing old conjecture based upon a single novel.

@con17 It's called a "theory" for a reason. There is no proof that it is real. But it is accepted as fact, which has become more of a dogma. Anyways...I beleive in the Bible...but knowing that there are trillions of planets out there...why can't one spawn intelligent life?

Leave it to the creationists to make a public display of their ignorance of the definition of the term 'theory' as it applies to Science.

They are their own worst enemies.

Theory:a speculative or conjectural view or idea. Is that not clear to you?

There is no way that humans evolved from fish. The evolutionists see adaptation and mistake it for something that is not real..eviloution. Blue eyes are an adaptation...but no animal mutates into a new phylum,class, order, this has NEVER been observed. Pitbulls are a result of cross breeding...but you could NEVER cross breed it into a cat. It's still a dog.

The argument that uses mutation as a basis for macro evolution is bogus.

LOL, yep, you seem to have no clue at ALL how 'scientific theory' is defined. A scientific theory isn't a guess, evidence gives rise to theories, not the other way around.

Again, LOL.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

1. the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another; the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art .

@Aldrons Last Hope: You're right, there is no way humans evolved from fish. You see, it's been a long time coming since our first common ancestor left the sea. That common ancestor most certainly did not turn from fish to human, that's absurdity. If you would like to speak of evolution, please please please actually learn about it, and stop trying to make a mockery of it by reiterating the absurd comparisons you've heard others make(albeit unsuccessfully).

Indeed shutterpod.

A FACT AND A THEORY
In science a "theory" is an explanation, not a guess. The "theory of evolution" is the explanation of how based upon the observable evidence. Similarly, the "theory of gravity" explains how gravity occurs. Theory too, is also evolving as more observable evidence becomes available.

And to Aldrons Last Hope.
"There is no way that humans evolved from fish."

Then why can we construct an evolutionary family tree independently based on embryological development? The evolutionary history of an organism unfolds during its development. For example, birds are descendants of dinosaurs thus carry their DNA. So in its early stages, a chicken embryo will develop dinosaur traits like a long tail, teeth, and 3-fingered hands.

Finally, the debate begins!

@ThisNameTaken
I will ignore the ad hominem attacks and merely address the objections raised to the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible.
“-Pi doesn’t equal three” Ha ha ha. So funny I nearly forgot to laugh.
“-The earth is not a circle, it is a three dimensional obloidal sphere. Nor does it have four corners.” If you did not know this, the Bible was not originally written in English. The passage that the “circle of the earth” is taken from was originally written in Hebrew. As with any foreign language, there are words in Hebrew that can, depending on the context, be translated in different ways. The Hebrew word chuwg [khoog] that was translated as “circle” is the same word that would have been used to describe the shape of a ball. Why it is translated as “circle” here, I’m not sure. The “four corners” is merely a poetic way of saying the four directions.
“-The sun should be created before the plants as plants need sunlight to photosynthesise [error in original].” Well, if creation week is to be taken literally, the sun was created the day after plants were. One day without the sun is not enough to kill a plant.
“-bats aren’t birds.” I agree. The verses from which this difficulty arises are telling which animals the Israelites were not allowed to eat. The word that is translated here “fowls” or “birds” could have be translated as “flying things.” Also, the classification of animals and plants into their present categories did not begin until the time of Carolus Linnaeus (who, btw, was a creationist himself) in the eighteenth century.
“-hares don’t chew cud.” You are right again, in the conventional sense. While hares don’t regurgitate their food and chew it again like we would commonly assume this phrase means, they do chew their food again. When they swallow their food, it passes completely through their digestive system and is expelled as feces, but the hare then immediately slurps it up again and starts the process over. You cannot honestly dispute the accuracy of a text using a definition of a word that was created centuries after the text was written.
“-the sky is not a solid structure” Umm, so what? Does the Bible say it is?
“-the sun does not move around the earth.” I would guess that you got this from the same misinterpretation that the Roman Catholic Church made of a verse that says “from the rising of the sun.” Have you never used the terms “sunrise” or “sunset”? If saying the sun rises is to be taken literally, then every English-speaking person I have met is a geocentrist.
“-Insects do not have four legs.” I’m not sure where this came from.
“-People do not live to be 600 years old.” I agree. However, if the Bible is true, people lived even longer than that several millennia ago.
“-The Israelite population went from 75 to several million in a few hundred years.” Actually, the several million figure does not include merely the descendents of those 75 Israelites. What the Bible says is that 600,000 Israelite men, not including the women and children, exited Egypt. This number probably includes the “mixed multitude” that is mentioned in the next verse. But even if all the several million were the descendants of Israel, it would not be impossible. Israel (also known as Jacob) had twelve sons and one daughter. Assuming that each of these children had only three surviving children who lived on to reproduce only three more surviving children, and so on, for four hundred thirty years, it would add up quite quickly (seeing that Israel had thirteen children, this is a very conservative number). If the generations are set to be thirty years, and they lived to be an average of sixty years old (also a conservative number in light of Israel’s age of 130), those alive to compose the “several million” to leave Egypt would compose of only the last two generations. This would put the number at approximately 80,000,000 people. I don’t think “several million” is an exaggeration at all. If the average age were only forty years, there would be at least sixty-two million people leaving.
And I could answer the rest of your objections if I felt like it, but I think this illustrates my point: Christians aren’t as stupid as you think. I have seen numerous lame objections like the ones you have put forth, and none of them so far have been unanswerable. I’m not quite sure which of these you meant to accomplish with your post: to show Christians are stupid because they believe such an “error-filled” book as the Bible, or to show how stupid Christians are because they wouldn’t realize the ridiculousness of most, if not all, of these objections.
Well, I can’t resist answering an objection raised by someone else: “Omnipotence is impossible; can God create a rock so large He can’t lift it? [Slightly altered from the original]” Omnipotence means all-powerful. Someone who is omnipotent can create anything and everything that can exist. God can’t create an object too heavy for Him to lift because such a thing cannot not exist. He also can’t create a geometric square that is a geometric circle at the same time because their definitions preclude the possibility of such an object’s existence. So, I’ll throw a question at you, “What came first, the chicken or the egg?” I mean this literally, what evolved first, a chicken or an egg?

@ThisNameTaken

And one more of your objections:
"-Prayer will not cure you of illness. How many Christians do you know that use hospitals and medicine when they are ill..? Umm, first of all, myself. And nearly every other Christian I have known throughout my life has, when necessary, gone to a hospital or used medicine when ill. Don't judge a group of people by some on the fringe.

And, the first part of your statement does not necessarily necessitate the second. Prayer does not cure illness. If prayer has any effect on the situation, it is because God hears prayer and answers it. If God is sovereign, as most people who call themselves Christians would say, hospitals and medicine exist because He allows them. There is no passage in the Bible that gives us command to avoid physical help for physical ailments.

con17 what a bunch of hogwash.

This forum is again high-jacked by narrowed minded people who thinks god does all our thinking for us. We might as well go live next to Al-Qaeda rat people in caves and let god sort this all out for us.

con17

No debate. I've learned after many years debating that no amount of reason and logic will speak to a person ruled by their emotions. Akin to the ostrich sticking its head in the sand when threatened, no amount of scientific evidence and/or discovery will get you to understand the impossibility of spending 3 days in whales gastrointestinal acids deep within the muscular walls and lining of its digestive tract while under thousands upon thousands of pounds of pressure as the animals dives deep into the oceanic abyss the entire time with no air to breathe... only to be spit out later on while walking it off like its no big deal.

Your answers and logic, like all whom subscribe to imaginary friends is circular in reasoning. You quote your book as infallible and inerrant. You then say “Prayer does not cure illness. If prayer has any effect on the situation, it is because God hears prayer and answers it.” But obvious you like a lot of Christians ignore what Jesus actually says in the Bible also tending to add things to the actual words to make them say something else. If you honestly and truthfully read these quotes, without adding to them, it is very easy to see that Jesus is not saying that God will think about your prayers. He says God will grant all your prayers. Clearly, God doesn’t grant all prayers and this proves that Jesus was a habitual liar.

1) And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21:21-22)

2) Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8)

3) Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:19-20)

4) Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24-25)

5) And I tell you, ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Luke 11:9-13)

6) And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14:13-14)

7) If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you. (John 15:7)

8) It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you. (John 15:16)

9) On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have not asked anything in my name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete. (John 16:23-24)

Jesus is quoted many times in the Bible saying that a believer can ask for anything through prayer and receive it. He even goes so far as to say that mountains and trees can be thrown into the sea simply by praying for it. This is clearly a lie, and can be proven to be a lie by any believer. Simply pray for me to be converted to Christianity right away. Or better yet ask God to move the mountains behind my house. He could make a lot of converts that way. If I’m converted today, I’ll post a public apology and devote my life to kissing God’s arse. If I’m not converted it would only be fair for you to apologize and devote your life to kissing mine. :)

@Con17: (1) Omnipotent(n): the state of being omnipotent; having unlimited power.

Defition via princeton wordwebtnet. If you'd like to argue the definition of omnipotent, please feel free to email the scholars there.

Is there a need for me to define unlimited? If an "omnipotent being" has limits to it's abilities, it is not omnipotent.

"Which evolved first, the chicken or the egg"

Dinosaurs laid eggs.

Car accidents, that come in the blink of an eye, and leave terror and death in their wake. Industrial mishaps whose victims can scarcely be recognized. Hate fueled war-fare with casualties that leave the world reeling. Natural disasters, which show us fledglings just how frail, and powerless we really are. Infectious diseases, debilitating afflictions, and crippling genetic disorders. Our world is full of terrifying things. But nothing out there scares me more than the blind faith of the religious masses, who will steadfastly cling to their dark-age beliefs despite overwhelming evidence that can not only be seen, and touched, but tested, repeated, falsified and reported on. You bible-humpers... terrify me, you remind me of the crusades. You remind me of the salem witch trials. You remind me of the holocaust. You remind me of Manifest Destiny. You remind me how simple, and un-evolved a species we really are, because even the best, and brightest of us, can't reason with you, or your ilk. Amusingly enough, we know we can't... and we still try.

@ ThisNameTaken - Good try, even speaking their language it's impossible to actually communicate. I'd say give up, but we're all in the same boat, and unfortunately, we just have to try and work with them.

Someday, agnostics, and atheists must unite... you know it as well as I do, most of the human blood that has ever been spilled, in all human history, has been shed in the name of the judeo-christian god.

Severeign

I know. Damned if you do damned if you don't. You quote the bible since it is all they listen to anyhow...

Then you get:

"If you dont believe it why are you quoting it"
"It was the translation it really means....."
"That is symbolic/poetic/parable/up to interpretation/etc, it really means....."
"Your taking it out of context, it really means....." <- that one kills me. I can quote an entire paragraph or two or three and im "out of context... they post a 1 liner like "Jesus wept" and add a 5 hour dissertation about what it "really" means, of course never out of context lol.

Fine. I'll admit it: as a 17 year old Christian, I don't know everything. But, if you have a better explanation for why the product of millions of years of evolving slime should be physically affected by the sight of a beautiful sunset or sound waves bouncing off its ear drums in a particular cadence and frequency, or how a complex language like that found in DNA (which is found in every living thing in very similar formations, with no sign of more "primitive" organisms having more "primitive" DNA) could come out of a mere mixture of its chemical components without outside intelligent help, or why, in a world supposedly created entirely through survival of the fittest, the strong overcome the weak, why compassion exists, please explain.

I got this.

@Con17 and his brethren

No. People have been arguing with the likes of you for millenia. Fortunately we can't be burned at the stake for it anymore, but that doesn't change the fact that it's completely pointless.

You see the world through star-struck eyes, that see only what your god allows you. And seeing anything else is a threat to your spoiled, self-preening, malicious, egotistical child-god.

You can keep your god. You can keep your beliefs. Just don't try and blend them with science. Where logic and reasoning exists... god cannot, and vice versa, why you people are even reading popsci is beyond me. Faith is important, it's one of the very few things that seperate us from the other animals (Note I said OTHER animals). But religion, is evil, it was made by humans, to control humans. The bible was not penned by god. Nor was it edited or produced by god. He didn't even sign the inside cover. So just go hump your bible, please, and leave the exploration of reality to those willing to look past the scribblings of humans that have been dead for 2000 + years.

@Con17: More primitive form of DNA? RNA.

The things that you described as being beautiful ARE beautiful, but not because some deity made them. They are beautiful because out of the chaos of our universe, such things exist, and they exist because of time and natural processes. Relinquishing one's bible-handicap does not make the world a less beautiful place, in fact I'd rather argue that it makes it so much more beautiful when you understand exactly how deadly the rest of space and the universe we know of is to us. Earth is a special place, because it is where we live, it is our home. Thinking that Earth is special only because some bearded sky man made it so is such a crippling, limited view, and it really does prevent one from seeing the absolute true beauty of the universe and everything within it.

In the end though it is your choice to believe what you will, be it in myth or in fact. There is never a need to feel fear, resentment, or anger towards science because it disagrees with what you've been told your whole life. Science isn't out to get you or what your religion requires you to believe. Science will move on, whether or not you're on-board.

Having said that, if you choose to continue believing the bible as infallible, please keep it to somewhere where it's accepted. PopSci is a scientific publication, and I'm quite positive the writers and editors of PopSci don't sign up to Christian forums and begin debates there, so please don't do the same here.

(P.S. - Apparently PopSci thinks I'm a spammer every single time I post. :sigh: Does this happen to anyone else?)

@Fallacy

I'm sorry, you seem to have misunderstood my statement about beauty. I did not say that beauty cannot exist if you don't believe the Bible. I was asking how can you explain our perception of beauty if all we are are the products of blind chance. How can random chance governed by natural laws result in organisms which perceive something like beauty in a sunset, something that would in no way help a species survive over another species? How did the perception of beauty start in the first place? Please stop telling me that it can and tell me how.

I tried sitting on the sidelines after this one went all askew, but I would like to interject a little now. Beauty can be explained as pattern recognition to an extreme. The evolutionary advantage of pattern recognition is huge. The fact that humans took their general purpose computer of a brain and ran with it to heights beyond just mere survival is truly amazing! The fact that humans can also come up with such horrible feats of depravity is amazing in its own way. Neither requires a God or a Devil to exist. Religion is not all evil. Science is not all good. We humans had, and still have fears. Religion is one way created to cope. As John Lennon famously said, whatever gets you through the night. I have my own personal beliefs involving time traveling Elvis impersonators, two dairy cows and a Bic lighter, but I don't go pushing it on people. Seriously though, my Dad, after working for years in the field of biological science, became a minister. He always said science was humanity figuring out the how, and religion the why. He is very liberal for a minister. Some like it. Some don't. I for one would never consider him any less intelligent or more belligerent because of his beliefs. He is an amazingly brilliant and almost falteringly kind person. To lump all people of faith together and slap a stereotype on them isn't exactly showing the best humanity has to offer either.

There was a request for evidence of evolution.

Here's a pretty good list: www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And here's an explanation of evolution (including misconceptions, more evidence, etc): www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

Gorilla walks like a man.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrQf6cogMuI

@ Craiglsj I agree with you, there are some truly good, and insightful people of faith out there. The Bill Maher movie "Religulous" features a few amazingly insightful men of the cloth. ( As well as their antithesis... Do I drop the last "s" if that's pluralized?)However, the infallibility movement, and those adhering to the book in question, as being un-erringly true... can be safely lumped together. They are only a christ and a cross away from any other extremists. It's amazing how easily people are goaded into this sort of argument. I for one just couldn't help myself, even though upstairs, I understood it was as fruitless as discussing the intricacies of needle-point with a fish. Why can't I just ignore them? I always try... and fail.

@ Fallacy Yes, it thinks I'm a spammer too, and I continually prove it wrong.

So yeah.. planets, inside black holes. Nifty stuff huh? Does this mean that for all intents and purposes it could be considered a finite pocket universe? How would the supposed law of relativity be affected when matter accelerates past the event horizon... then slows down again? For that matter... how would the matter be affected?

@severeign: To again pull my Dad in without his knowledge or consent... In short, he gave a sermon once where he said true faith doesn't need to be jealously defended. If your faith is strong it can survive slings and arrows, verbal or real. Those who strongly fight against any perceived threat to their beliefs often are in doubt of what they truly believe. That goes for almost all "faiths". The strongest faiths, in fact, will spread to those around with little effort (his thoughts still).

I don't think it would be a pocket universe as matter can enter from outside. I an unaware of any similar phenomenon in our universe, making it a closed system.

Am I the only one thinking of the Dr Who episode "Impossible Planet" here?

Other things that come to mind the Maw complex in the Starwars universe but this was outside of the event horizon.

BTW it would have to be a super massive black hole the kind you find in the centers of galaxies.

If the aliens have very powerful antigravity technology or the means to create worms holes they could in theory exit the black hole.
Only an extremely advanced civilization could pull it off.

Now the problems for such worlds they would be endangered by the stuff falling in which is usually the case with a large blackhole.

yes this is possible. for life will strive to live in any circumstances. if an alien civilization is as advanced as those in movies like star wars than yes they can exist in black-holes. im sure there are both evil and peaceful alien civilizations. i know this because here on earth we have both evil and peaceful countries. so yeah some would hide in blackholes if they had the technology.

Ruri: Or, as my first post on this topic suggested...the Heechee from the Heechee saga series by Fredrik Pohl.

... to those of you talking about evolution and god.... well
http://www.thetech.org/genetics/news.php?id=124 (44 chromosomes)

secondly the "theory of evolution" is exactly what it sounds like: a theory. It is more likely to be true before other ones but that does not prove shit. also correlations in species can also point to a single creative mind rather than a progressive change. in addition to this the sheer probability of this happening is so improbable that it is remarkable that anyone calling themselves a "scientist" could or would support this but... thats called faith. isnt it.

to those of you christians, new testament was only written by disciples and there are other books, but the church chose which ones to include and exclude. Jesus never wrote shit about himeself<- written by man.

to those of you that will try to ride the old testament, the old testament is considered extremely accurate for several reasons : compared with 2000 years ago essentially the same meaning they have strong oral/ written tradition that is very very likely to be accurate, and it is considered to be basically the most accurate history book we have concerning themselves and those populations near them aka most events likely happend though the miraculous and others may be ficitonal or misattributed( or possibly true).
to those of you that will rag on grammar, etc. fuck you for being you.
to those of you arguing about being right without any real evidence or minimal evidence and blind faith in your own beliefs, get the fuck off your fucking "im a part of the vocal retards that must be right because that creates my reality shit cause scientists / other ppl said so". fuck yourselves cause you prevent progress.

to the article i agree with some comments above: it would be fucking awesome, and if possible amazing, but rationally if they are that advanced highly unlikely.

kamikazesmiley

O.k. 44 chromosomes... And? It is pretty amazing how evolution works though. Did you actually READ the article or did it go over your head? "This is an important finding because it tells us about a key genetic event in human prehistory. All the evidence points to humans, like their relatives the chimpanzees, having 48 chromosomes a million or so years ago." … and this is supposed to help the biblical argument how???

I don't understand the point of the article unless it is to support evolution. I mean, towards the end I suppose it attempts to debunk with your classic 'the odds are too tremendous' argument... "Right now having this particular set of chromosomes is probably a 1 in 7 billion sort of thing" and "An alternative is that dumb luck allowed the 46 chromosome humans to win. Perhaps people with 46 chromosomes were in an isolated community somewhere and the rest of humanity was wiped out. Certainly humanity has had near death experiences before. The most recent one was probably 75,000 or so years ago.” So you accept 75,000 years not the biblical 6000 years? The odds game... Ever play bridge? Fascinating game. Did you know that the Odds against receiving a perfect hand (13 cards in one suit) = 169,066,442 to 1. The odds against both members of a partnership receiving a Yarborough = 546,000,000 to 1. And more amazingly, the Odds against each player having a complete suit = 2,235,197,406,895,366,368,301,559,999 to 1. So what’s the point??? All it takes is one time….. So just because the odds are so astronomical does the mere fact I was just dealt a perfect bridge hand mean it didn’t happen?

You also CLEARLY don’t understand theory. Once again, In science a "theory" is an explanation, not a guess. The "theory of evolution" is the explanation of how based upon the observable evidence. Similarly, the "theory of gravity" explains how gravity occurs. Theory too, is also evolving as more observable evidence becomes available. If you want to argue theory, please jump off a bridge and prove theory wrong.

Your assumption about the accuracy of the bible too is with great questionable regards. You talk about oral tradition, but why are there other such detailed records dating from as early as 1 BCE and yet the actual existence of historical Jesus himself is of academic debate among the smartest minds around in the field (which by judging grammar and sentence structure, you obviously are not one of them.)

You clearly are a wo/man of faith that excels in showing how brotherly and Christ-Like you are spewing off that profanity. Job well done. *sarcastic thumbs up*

^Love thy neighbor, unless they do not adhere to your dogma.

@ThisNameTaken
Please explain to me how could we be so different from other life forms within the earth and that they cant have rational thinking like we do. I truly believe that some higher life form made us to differentiate from them by doing something with our DNA. If those life forms can do it then why cant we? Then again, we would be playing God, this kind of thinking debunks me every time. You cannot just say that evolution made us like this because rational thinking cant just happen, it must be taught or made by inception.

@MusicMeister185: Your entire thought process is unfortunately folly. You're basing your reasoning off large assumptions. Research is showing that many, many different species of animals are MUCH more intelligent than we previously thought. Honeybees alone can actually recognize faces, with a brain that is smaller than a pin-head. To think that we as a species must be special because of self inflection and thought processes which allow us to send men to the moon(or other grand occurrences) is a GIANT leap of faith.

After all, it is quite plain to see that human intelligence has been directly proportional to our survival as a species. Without the cognitive abilities needed to communicate and plan with fellow humans, our species would have perished a long time ago on a plain far away from our quaint little homes.

Your arms are to short to box with God.

God created the universe..the most humans can do is to try to contemplate it.

@ALH: If you're going to make a statement and present it as true, you need to have physical evidence to back it up. If you state that my arms are too short to box with "God" then you need to provide the exact distance between myself and "God", which can be measured again and again by other unbiased and fair sources.

Seeing as you cannot produce that, please make it known that your statements are of your own opinion, and are not based in observable fact. Thanks, have a nice day.

@MusicMeister

Saying that rational thinking can't be a function of evolution seems a bit... short sighted. It seems to me that rational thinking (as opposed to blind panic, or completely instinctual reaction) would be a beneficial evolutionary trait for *most* creatures. It could even be attributed to complex path finding that most higher mammals and birds perform regularly. After all a logical, rational path would be more advantageous than an illogical, irrational path don't you think?

People keep clinging to the astronomical improbabilities of things being exactly the way they are... and in the same instance forget the astronomically vast visible universe. Who's numbers are so incomprehensible... we don't have words for them, they have to be broken down to exponents simply because the average human literally can't comprehend the scale of it all. It might be a one in a billion trillion chance... and guess what, with a universe this big... it's probably happened a few times. And if the universe is truly infinite... Everything that can happen, will happen. No matter how finite, or remote the chance of it happening. (I know this is going to invite more bible humping... but they don't need a reason to spooge their theistic seed all over everything they see.)

yup, this is where aliens come from! these are the dark pits of hell.. if this dosnt look familiar then sorry your a foul.